No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Patterns of co-authorship among economics departments in the USA
Applied Economics
Abstract
Given the steady increase in co-authored papers in economics journals, this paper reports a study of the patterns of co-authorship between US universities and colleges. A majority of institutions produce more co-authored than single-authored papers. Contacts with researchers from the same institution are still an important source of co-authored papers, even though slightly decreasing in frequency. The determinants of co-authorship outside the own institution are tested in a gravity model and it is found that distance and other geographical variables do not matter. However, the quality of co-authors' institutions, measured by rankings of institutions, has a significant impact on the number of co-authored papers in top economics journals.
... Different data sources and, thus, different disciplinary classifications are used to obtain trends depicted in Figure 3 (a). Previously published results concern the data related to top journals and, presumably, to output coming from "advanced" countries (the dominant contribution is typically made by the authors from the US, see [29]). On the contrary, almost 87% of publications in our data set are not indexed in Scopus or WoS databases. ...
... On the contrary, almost 87% of publications in our data set are not indexed in Scopus or WoS databases. Another difference is that other studies [20,21,22,23,25,24,29] are often centered on the top economic journals rather than on the data related to a particular country. The exception is [25], where the search was performed by authors' affiliation country (Denmark) -the corresponding imaginary slope for resulting data is the most similar to the one for Ukrainian data (Figure 3 (a)). ...
... The exception is [25], where the search was performed by authors' affiliation country (Denmark) -the corresponding imaginary slope for resulting data is the most similar to the one for Ukrainian data (Figure 3 (a)). denote data points taken from texts or digitized plots (WebPlotDigitizer is used, [28]) in [20,21,23,29,22,25,24]. The data for Ukrainian economic research are shown by diamons: (a) solid for the entire set of real Crossref data and open for manually shifted ones; (b) solid for real Crossref data excluding the publications indexed also in Scopus or WoS and crossed for Scopus data. ...
Our study is one of the first examples of multidimensional and longitudinal disciplinary analysis at the national level based on Crossref data. We present a large-scale quantitative analysis of Ukrainian economics. This study is not yet another example of research aimed at ranking of local journals, authors or institutions, but rather exploring general tendencies that can be compared to other countries or regions. We study different aspects of Ukrainian economics output. In particular, the collaborative nature, geographic landscape and some peculiarities of citation statistics are investigated. We have found that Ukrainian economics is characterized by a comparably small share of co-authored publications, however, it demonstrates the tendency towards more collaborative output. Based on our analysis, we discuss specific and universal features of Ukrainian economic research. The importance of supporting various initiatives aimed at enriching open scholarly metadata is considered. A comprehensive and high-quality meta description of publications is probably the shortest path to a better understanding of national trends, especially for non-English speaking countries. The results of our analysis can be used to better understand Ukrainian economic research and support research policy decisions.
... Previously published results concern the data related to top journals and, presumably, to output coming from "advanced" countries (the dominant contribution is typically made by the authors from the US, see Sutter & Kocher (2004)). On the contrary, almost 87% of publications in our data set are not indexed in Scopus or WoS databases. ...
... On the contrary, almost 87% of publications in our data set are not indexed in Scopus or WoS databases. Another difference is that other studies, such as McDowell & Melvin (1983); Hudson (1996); Nowell & Grijalva (2011); Laband and Tollison (2000); Kuld & O'Hagan (2018); Henriksen (2018); Sutter and Kocher (2004) are often centered on the top economic journals rather than on the data related to a particular country. The exception is Henriksen (2018), where the search was performed by authors' affiliation country (Denmark)-the corresponding imaginary slope for resulting data is the most similar to the one for Ukrainian data (Fig. 3). ...
Our study is one of the first examples of multidimensional and longitudinal disciplinary analysis at the national level based on Crossref data. We present a large-scale quantitative analysis of Ukrainian economic research. This study is not yet another example of research aimed at ranking of local journals, authors or institutions, but rather exploring general tendencies that can be compared to other countries or regions. We study different aspects of Ukrainian economic research output. In particular, the collaborative nature, geographic landscape and some peculiarities of citation statistics are investigated. We have found that Ukrainian economic research is characterized by a comparably small share of co-authored publications, however, it demonstrates the tendency towards more collaborative output. Based on our analysis, we discuss specific and universal features of Ukrainian economic research. The importance of supporting various initiatives aimed at enriching open scholarly metadata is considered. A comprehensive and high-quality meta description of publications is probably the shortest path to a better understanding of national trends, especially for non-English speaking countries. The results of our analysis can be used to better understand Ukrainian economic research and support research policy decisions.
... Specifically, the share of co-authored papers in the leading 15 economics journals increased from 30 percent in 1977 to 54 percent in 1997 (Sutter and Kocher 2004). Co-authorship in the top three political science journals increased sevenfold from the 1950s to the mid-1990s, and the percentage of co-authorship of papers in WOS's twenty-three public administration journals jumped from 40 percent in 1973 to 84 percent in 2007 (Corley and Sabharwal 2010;Fisher, Cobane, Vander Ven, and Cullen 1998). ...
... Multi-institutional collaboration has also increased in the social sciences. In economics, the share of all co-authored publications written by authors from different institutions rose from around 50 percent in 1977 to around 70 percent in 1997 (Sutter and Kocher 2004). In sociology, the share of co-authored papers in ASR and AJS written by authors from different institutions rose from 52 percent in the 1960s to 65 percent in the 1980s, but, interestingly, leveled off after the 1980s (Hunter and Leahey 2008). ...
Academic research has become increasingly collaborative, not just in the hard sciences and engineering but also in the social sciences. In this paper, we review studies that have documented this increasing collaboration, showing that collaboration, especially in the form of co-authorship, has risen across the board in almost all academic disciplines and across institutions and geographic regions of the world. What accounts for this rise? We identify four potential benefits to collaboration: greater learning opportunities, gains from a more complex division of labor, enhanced motivation and discipline, and reductions in the development cycle of projects. However, four potential pitfalls can hinder the collaborative process: decreased individual productivity, partner opportunism, communication and coordination challenges, and conflicting time horizons. Because we think these problems can ruin a research project, we offer strategies on how to overcome them: clearly defining the scope and logic of the project, agreeing upon responsibilities, enforcing deadlines and giving and receiving timely feedback, and using coordination mechanisms that facilitate the collaborative process. We conclude by discussing the implications our review has not only for aspiring academics but also for the organization of academic enterprises.
... Through globalisation, changing communication patterns and increasing mobility of scientists, a rise in collaborative research, especially international collaboration, has been witnessed over the two past decades (Adams 2012;Glänzel and Schubert 2004). Since the 1990s, this upward trend in multiple-authorship can be observed in all areas of science from medicine and biosciences to mathematics and law (Adams 2012) as well as social science disciplines such as economics (Laband and Tollison 2000;Sutter and Kocher 2004), political science (Adams et al. 2014;Fisher et al. 1998), and sociology (Hunter and Leahey 2008). Of these, Hunter and Leahey (2008) take the most in-depth look at collaboration patterns. ...
... First, formal research collaboration as measured by multiple authorship in papers presented at the EPC has risen overtime. This trend is similar to other social science disciplines such as economics (Laband and Tollison 2000;Sutter and Kocher 2004), political science (Fisher et al. 1998), and sociology (Hunter and Leahey 2008;Pontille 2003). Previous studies find that co-authored papers more frequently involve empirical studies, quantitative research and/or survey than theoretical, interview and qualitative work (Henriksen 2018;Hunter and Leahey 2008). ...
Studies of collaborative networks of demographers are relatively scarce. Similar studies in other social sciences provide insight into scholarly trends of both the fields and characteristics of their successful scientists. Exploiting a unique database of metadata for papers presented at six European Population Conferences, this report explores factors explaining research collaboration among demographers. We find that (1) collaboration among demographers has increased over the past 10 years, however, among co-authored papers, collaboration across institutions remains relatively unchanged over the period, (2) papers based on core demographic subfields such as fertility, mortality, migration and data and methods are more likely to involve multiple authors and (3) multiple author teams that are all female are less likely to co-author with colleagues in different institutions. Potential explanations for these results are discussed alongside comparisons with similar studies of collaboration networks in other related social sciences.
... Researchers over time (i.e., Petry (1988) Hudson (1996), Sutter and Kocher (2004)) have observed a trend towards co-authorship. Brown, Chang, and Chen (2011) note that the trend in coauthorship is upward and consistently higher for the top three finance journals. ...
Intellectual contributions are a key measure of university faculty productivity. This study examines the intellectual contributions of members of the Academy of Finance shared with others through the organization’s publications over the 2003-2016 period. Information presented ranges from journal-specific data such as pages to author-specific info such as institution and geographic location. The comprehensive investigation allows readers to gain an understanding of both the breadth and depth of the articles published in this house organ over time. We thereby demonstrate the contribution of the Academy of Finance to both the author’s careers and finance’s body of knowledge.
... According to Baffes and Vamvakidis (2011), the "shared prize" effect may also reflect Table 5 Investigating the relationship between certain variables and the period between the publication of Nobel laureates' prize-winning work and the conferment of a Nobel Prize. a rising trend of collaboration in research, as discussed in Adams et al. (2005) and Sutter and Kocher (2004). The results in Table 5 also indicate that obtaining doctoral degrees earlier seems to reduce the Nobel waiting period slightly, since the related parameter has a negative sign. ...
The time lag between the publication of a major scientific discovery and the conferment of a Nobel Prize has been rapidly increasing for the natural science disciplines (chemistry,
medicine-physiology, and physics), but has not yet matched the corresponding “waiting
period” for the Nobel Prize in Economics. The aim of the present study is to empirically
examine the time gap between pioneering work and Nobel recognition and discuss possible explanations for its variation across time and disciplines. The analysis provides evidence to support the argument that attributes such as bestowments of accolades widely regarded as Nobel Prize precursors, citation indices, and sharing of the award between multiple recipients, may explain this variation, but only to some extent. In the discussion that follows, the notably longer waiting period in economics is attributed to factors such as the laureates’ age, the impact of which the current study cannot empirically examine. Since the Nobel Prize cannot be awarded posthumously, the Nobel Committee members may tend to grand the award to older economists before they pass away and become ineligible.
... The proportion of co-authored publications to the single-authored publications was calculated using the following formula: According to Sutter & Kocher (2004), a ratio greater than 0.5 indicates more co-authored than single-authored publications, and a ratio of less than 0.5 indicates more single-authored than coauthored publications. The density (the ratio of the number of actual edges to all possible edges in graph with the same number of nodes) of each network was calculated to find which networks are dense and which are sparse. ...
SLIS Connecting 2(1), Spring/Summer 2013:
"Talk dirty to me: Why Books about Sex and Relationships Belong in Libraries" Stacy Creel;
"46th Annual Fay B. Kaigler Children’s Book Festival" Karen Rowell
"Highlights of a Practicum: The Hattiesburg Coca-Cola Plant Collectibles Museum"
Bernadette Birzer;
"Smith Wright Mercantile Store Ledger 1841 – 1845: Documenting the Content and History of Archival Materials" Donna Ballard;
"A Collection Analysis of the African-American Poetry Holdings in the de Grummond Collection" Sarah J. Heidelberg;
"Scientometric Analysis of Scientific Products with Co-authorship Networks: The Case of Sharif University of Technology" Maryam Asadi, Somayeh Joolaei, Saman Saqhafi, and Azam Bazrafshan
... Although the alleged importance of physical proximity between co-authors is sensitive to the nature and technological context of the research in question , and economists might still benefit from positive agglomeration effects that can be offered by large and prestigious departments with significant spillover for their colleagues in certain fields (Bosquet and Combes, 2017), distant collaborations have already become fairly common among economists as documented by Laband and Tollison (2000) and Hamermesh and Oster (2002) among others. Sutter and Kocher (2004) investigate the effect of distance between collaborators in a gravity model and find no effect of collaborators' distance or other geographic variables on the quality of the collaboration output. Hoekman et al. (2010) as well as Freeman and Huang (2015) point to physical distance as an important ingredient of the quality of collaboration, yet they do not investigate further what is actually driving a distant collaboration. ...
We analyze economics PhDs’ collaborations in peer-reviewed journals from 1990 to 2014 and investigate such collaborations’ quality in relation to each co-author’s research quality, field and specialization. We find that a greater overlap between co-authors’ previous research fields is significantly related to a greater publication success of co-authors’ joint work and this is robust to alternative specifications. Co-authors that engage in a distant collaboration are significantly more likely to have a large research overlap, but this significance is lost when co-authors’ social networks are accounted for. High quality collaboration is more likely to emerge as a result of an interaction between specialists and generalists with overlapping fields of expertise. Regarding interactions across subfields of economics (interdisciplinarity), it is more likely conducted by co-authors who already have interdisciplinary portfolios, than by co-authors who are specialized or starred in different subfields.
... Finally, we empirically investigate how IMF Working Papers co-authorship relations are formed and maintained, which could be different from how the purely academic collaborations, on which the literature focuses, come about (see e.g., McDowell and Melvin, 1983;Sutter and Kocher, 2004;Liben-Nowell and Kleinberg, 2007;Frenken et al., 2009;Freeman and Huang, 2015;Colussi, 2018;Hsieh et al., 2018). Methodologically, our analysis of the determinants of research collaborations is closest to the work of Fafchamps et al. (2010), who study co-authorship in a large sample of peer-reviewed articles published during 1970-1999 in economics journals indexed in the EconLit database. ...
We study the determinants of new and repeated research collaborations, drawing on the co-authorship network of the International Monetary Fund (IMF)’s Working Papers series. Being an outlet where authors express their views on topics of interest, and given that IMF staff is not subject to the “publish-or-perish” conditions of the academia, the IMF Working Papers series constitutes an appropriate testing ground to examine the endogenous nature of co-authorship formation. We show that the co-authorship network is characterized by many authors with few direct co-authors, yet indirectly connected to each other through short co-authorship chains. We find that a shorter distance in the co-authorship network is key for starting research collaborations. Also, higher research productivity, being employed in the same department, and having citizenship of the same region help to start and repeat collaborations. Furthermore, authors with different co-authorship network sizes are more likely to collaborate, possibly reflecting synergies between senior and junior staff members.
... The discrepancy may reflect the differences in collaboration behavior between physics and economics. Sutter and Kocher (2004) include authors from only US institutions and use a broader base of economics journals than we use. They find that around half of the authors have co-authors within the same institution. ...
This paper aims to analyze the academic backgrounds of 3587 researchers who published in the top five economics journals in the last 10 years. We find that the researchers come from relatively diverse backgrounds at the undergraduate level, but their PhD degree-granting institutions are more concentrated. Most researchers work in a few prestigious institutions after their graduation. Therefore, co-worker relations among researchers are quite common. Many co-authors who are unrelated at the time of publication were co-workers in the past. Co-worker networks are found to be much denser than co-author networks.
... Authorship trendNo. of Authors Number of Multi-authored documents are now the norm in science as a result of the important role of collaboration in and inter-scientist collaboration have become essential for the advancement of science, scientists with different skills and specialization profiles may successfully collaborate for the development of research projects and the creation of new knowledge(Costas and Bordons 2011). Number of authors is used as a straight forward variable to reflect co-authorship(Sutter and Kocher 2004). ...
... …' (cited from p. 552). On the other hand, Sutter and Kocher (2004), applying a gravity model approach for the sample of 191 universities in the USA, show that '… the geographical distance between coauthors and their respective institutions is not important for the frequency of co-authored papers' (cited from p. 332). Zhou et al. (2016) in their research into university-industry collaborated publications for 83 Chinese and 166 US universities in the 2014 version of the Leiden University World University Ranking also find no relationship between geographical distance and research collaboration: 'In both China and the USA, distance is not critical for the establishment of domestic university-industry collaboration' (cited from p. 1). ...
The aim of this paper is to investigate theoretically and empirically the impact of research col-laborations on the scientific performance of Italian academic institutions. Data are derived from the in-ternational Scopus and Web of Science databases. We consider both quantity (the number of publica-tions made in collaboration) and quality indicators from different databases (using indexes such as IF5Y (5-year impact factor of the journal, Web of Science), SJR (SCImago Journal Rank – key integral indicator of the quality of journals, Scopus), IPP (Impact per Publication, Scopus), AIS (Article Influ-ence Scores, Web of Science), H-index (Google Scholar Hirsch-index metric) to evaluate the Italian case of scientific research. To this end, we develop a theoretical and empirical model to consider en-dogeneity of explanatory variables, the generalized method of moment (GMM) estimation. The results suggest that internal collaborations have a higher impact on the research quality index in Italy.
... Denmark is similar to the trend which is observed in other European countries, and at least for the economic data, it confirms a trend observed in other studies (e.g. Laband & Tollison, 2006;Sutter & Kocher, 2004). The inclusion of Asian, Southern European and Latin American countries would perhaps provide a different picture, since authorship norms are influenced by cultural norms. ...
Researchers have different ways of deciding on the author order, and how they do it often depends on the culture of their field. Some fields are well-known for using alphabetic author order while others put a great emphasis on the meaning of the author order and place authors according to contribution. This article is the first to use mixed method to examine the extent of alphabetic author order and to examine why researchers adopt a certain author order norm in the fields of economics and political science. The article finds that alphabetic authorship has been and is the norm in economics, while some tendency towards it exists in political science. The differences in the intellectual and social organisation of the fields seem to be a factor in the extent that these researchers will adopt a certain norm. Furthermore, the increasing number of authors per article and the publish-or-perish culture seems to put pressure on the alphabetic norm because it creates greater attention to the reputational advantages of being first-author.
... This is well documented in Economics and Finance, with a clear increase in collaborations among authors in recent years (e.g. Sutter and Kocher 2004;Goyal et al. 2006;Nowell and Grijalva 2011;Card and DellaVigna 2013;Rath and Wohlrabe 2015;Andrikopoulos and Economou 2016), although there is some controversy, and Moosa (2016) indicates that "citations are not related to the number of authors, which provides evidence against the proposition that multi-authored papers are of higher quality than single-authored papers". ...
Network analysis allows us to introduce different metrics that complement the traditional indicators to measure academic performance, generally based on individual production. In this paper, we show how the use of these techniques provides a more global point of view, introducing indicators that, beyond individual merits, measure the capacity of researchers to generate more intangible assets. We focus on collaboration among groups that can enrich the potential of the research ecosystem as a whole. We present not only numerical indicators, but also several visualisation schemes to see how this approach can help in the academic evaluation and decision-making process of research managers. We have used, as a case study, the research ecosystem formed by more than five thousand economists from Spanish institutions.
... Both fields have experienced a growth in number of articles as well as number of co-authored articles independent of research approach or type. The results show that the productivity of Danish researchers in international journals has increased along with coauthorship during the last 35 years, which corresponds with the general increase in the number of researchers and overall productivity in that period (Henriksen 2016;Sutter and Kocher 2004;Adams et al. 2014). ...
The number of co-authors has in the social sciences has been rising over the last decades, but a deeper understanding of why this rise is occurring is lacking. Previous studies of co-authorship in the social sciences often refer to the physical or life sciences or anecdotal evidence to explain these changes. This article examines the relationship between changes in co-authorship and research in Danish economics and political science to gain greater insights into whether there are changes in the research or in researchers' behavior. The analysis shows that articles with empirical research, quantitative research and/or survey are more likely to have a higher number of coauthors
than articles based on theoretical, interview, and qualitative research. Furthermore, international and interinstitutional Danish articles tend to have more coauthors than interinstitutional articles. The analysis also reveals that the average number of authors increases for articles with all types of research and research approaches. This indicates that the collaboration behavior of the researchers is changing.
... Econ., São Paulo, vol.47, n.4, p.617-679, out.-dez. 2017 2003; Sutter e Kocher 2004;Cainelli et al. 2015) ou definir métricas relevantes para a avaliação dos pesquisadores da área (Laband e Piette 1994;Kalaitzidakis et al. 2003;Kodrzycki e Yu 2006, Ritzberger 2008Combes e Linnemer 2010). ...
Resumo Este artigo apresenta os resultados de um estudo sobre as potencialidades da utilização dos dados curriculares derivados das informações da Plataforma Lattes como ferramentas para avaliação do desempenho científico de pesquisadores. Um novo indicador, denominado "Índice Multidimensional de Desempenho Científico" (IMDC), é proposto considerando um amplo conjunto de indicadores bibliométricos que buscam captar diferentes formas da produção acadêmica dos atuais pesquisadores vinculados à pós-graduação em Economia no Brasil. Os resultados permitem evidenciar uma tipologia de pesquisadores considerando suas diferentes estratégias de atuação. Economistas com maior impacto na profissão adotam uma estratégia caracterizada por um equilíbrio entre qualidade, quantidade e colaboração científica. Palavras-Chave Pós-graduação. Economia. Rankings de economistas. Mapeamento acadêmico. Redes sociais. Sociologia da economia.
... In the recent past, several researchers have analysed these questions. While there is wide agreement on the fact that there is a tendency towards multi-authored papers over the last decades, see, for instance, Sutter and Kocher (2004), Nowell and Grijalva (2011) or Rath and Wohlrabe (2016a), the effect of this phenomenon on the number of citations are controversially discussed. Using information about 300 top papers in economics from Research Papers in Economics (RePEC), Moosa (2016) analyses whether first, the link between the quality of a journal and the quality of the papers that are published therein and second a positive relationship between the number of authors and the number of citations are confirmed by the data. ...
In this article, we reconsider the investigation by Moosa (2016) using a much larger data set of almost one million articles listed in Research Papers in Economics. This article provides new insights into the effects of co-authorship on citation counts and the correlation between quality of papers and quality of the publishing journal. Our evidence is partially in contrast to the results reported in Moosa (2016). We find a positive correlation between the h-index of a journal and the quality of papers measured in terms of citations. This correlation becomes almost perfect using a nonlinear model. Results from a regression of citation counts on the number of authors show evidence of a positive and significant effect of co-authorship on the quality of a paper when time effects and large sets of top-cited articles are taken into account. The inclusion of time effects and the large data set, that allows to differentiate between top-cited cohorts, adds further insights to the existing literature.
... This study applied the bibliometric data and implemented publications co-authored by industry and universities as a meaningful and measurable indicator of UIC activity. Co-authored publications is an often used indicator for collaboration that is time invariant, verifiable, and practicable (Abramo, D'Angelo, Di Costa, and Solazzi, 2009;Boardman and Corley, 2008;He, Geng, and Campbell-Hunt, 2009;Katz and Martin, 1997;Kumar and Jan, 2013;Mattsson, Laget, Nilsson, and Sundberg, 2008;McFadyen and Cannella, 2004;Meadows and O'Connor, 1971;Sutter and Kocher, 2004;Wagner, 2005). Compared to survey or interview data, bibliometric data have multiple advantages. ...
Exploring new technological opportunities and reacting to environmental changes are key factors for firm perfor- mance. Collaborating with external partners, especially universities, is considered to be a powerful engine of technological development. However, there are several barriers associated with university–industry collaboration (UIC), such as divergent cultures and competing objectives. Previous studies show rather mixed effects regarding the purported benefits of UIC, and empirical evidence on the effects of UIC on technological newness of innova- tion is lacking. This study investigates whether and under which conditions UIC enhances the recombination of extant knowledge across technologies and facilitates the implementation of novel technologies at the firm level. The paper is based on the resource based view of the firm and analyzes the interaction between collaboration diversity and UIC intensity. This longitudinal analysis examines joint publications and the patent data of 318 technology-oriented companies from the S&P 500 Index in the years 1985–2007. This study focuses on technolog- ical newness as the dependent variable, defined as the extent to which new technology fields are discovered as a result of either exploration of completely new technologies or the novel combination of existing technology fields. Results show that UIC has a significant positive effect on technological newness, with a time lag of two years. The effect follows an inverted U-shaped pattern in UIC portfolios with high diversity, and a U-shaped pattern when diversity is low.
... Authorship trendNo. of Authors Number of Multi-authored documents are now the norm in science as a result of the important role of collaboration in and inter-scientist collaboration have become essential for the advancement of science, scientists with different skills and specialization profiles may successfully collaborate for the development of research projects and the creation of new knowledge(Costas and Bordons 2011). Number of authors is used as a straight forward variable to reflect co-authorship(Sutter and Kocher 2004). ...
... Authorship trendNo. of Authors Number of Multi-authored documents are now the norm in science as a result of the important role of collaboration in and inter-scientist collaboration have become essential for the advancement of science, scientists with different skills and specialization profiles may successfully collaborate for the development of research projects and the creation of new knowledge(Costas and Bordons 2011). Number of authors is used as a straight forward variable to reflect co-authorship(Sutter and Kocher 2004). ...
... For instance, a researcher's experience is positively related to the number of his authorship partnerships, with younger professors having a smaller probability of coauthoring a paper, possibly because they have not yet built a network of partners (McDowell and Melvin 1983;Piette and Ross 1992). Coauthorship is also more probable between authors who have the same affiliation and it is consistently fostered in highly ranked academic institutions (Piette and Ross 1992;Sutter and Kocher 2004). ...
This paper reviews the first forty years of the Journal of Econometrics. The focus of the paper is on collaboration patterns and the internationalization of research in econometrics. We report the most prolific authors, institutions and countries and we find that the share of collaborative articles has increased over time and that most contributions come from affiliations that are based in the USA (but decreasingly so). We also apply social network analysis and discover the most central authors, institutions and countries in the Journal of Econometrics. Moreover, we find that the coauthorship network has been increasingly integrated, exhibiting small-world properties.
... As shown in Figure 1, the number of authors per article (averaging 2.35) has varied from a low of 1.25 in Volume 15 to a high of 3.03 in Volume 27, a modest upward trend. This pattern is not unique to the field of agribusiness as it has been observed in other disciplines as well (Kyvik, 2003;Sutter & Kocher, 2004;Van Fleet & Bedeian, 2016). More importantly, citations per article published in Agribusiness have risen rather steadily, with a strong upward trend until recent years that have not yet had time to receive many citations. ...
Agribusiness: An International Journal, now a well-recognized journal in the discipline, completed its 30th year of publication in 2014. This article examines three decades of publication statistics to provide an understanding of its development and a brief look at its possible future. Thus, this is a bibliographic history of Agribusiness and a brief case study of organizational evolution.
... In fact, the existence of positive relationships between different forms of collaboration and scientific productivity and impact has been repeatedly documented (Eisend and Schmidt 2014;Ronda-Pupo et al. 2014). Research has focused not only on the effect of the existence of research collaboration (Lee and Bozeman 2005), but also on the authors' centrality position in scientific networks (Abbasi, Altmann and Hossain 2011), the prestige level of the academic institutions that participate in the networks (Sutter and Kocher 2004), and the heterogeneity level of collaboration networks and their relation to productivity (Seibert et al. 2014). ...
This article examines the scholarly production of Spanish-speaking countries in management and organizational studies, focusing
on scientific articles in peer-reviewed journals. We differentiate the production between two literature segments according
to publication language. The article’s goals are to analyze both segments of the academic literature and to identify what
characteristics of the authors lead them to publish in a particular segment. The analysis reveals that both the researchers’
human and social capital differentiate their participation in these literature segments. Most importantly, we demonstrate
that, regardless of these individual characteristics, the type of higher education institution where scholars are affiliated
with seems to significantly influence the segment of academic literature in which they predominantly publish.
... This has been documented in several studies using rather small set of journals. Sutter and Kocher (2004) show that the share of co-authored papers in 15 economics journals has increased from under 30% in 1977 to 54% in 1997. A similar trend is reflected by McDowell and Melvin (1983) for 8 economics journals, Laband and Tollison (2000) for 3 economics journals and Nowell and Grijalva (2011) for publications of faculty members of 129 US colleges. ...
This article investigates the recent trends in co-authorship in economics. Using data from more than 700 000 journal articles we show that the average number of authors per article has increased over the last years. This process is likely to be continued in the future. In a regression analysis, we present evidence how the authorship of papers is related to the number of citations, the JEL classification, the number of journal pages and the length of the title.
... The proportion of co-authored publications to the single-authored publications was calculated using the following formula: According to Sutter & Kocher (2004), a ratio greater than 0.5 indicates more co-authored than single-authored publications, and a ratio of less than 0.5 indicates more single-authored than coauthored publications. The density (the ratio of the number of actual edges to all possible edges in graph with the same number of nodes) of each network was calculated to find which networks are dense and which are sparse. ...
... The number of authors per article continued to rise during 1979e1983 to 1.77 per article. Sutter and Kocher (2004). ...
The rising incidence of co-authorship in academia generally is well documented. Research collaboration has been argued to bring some specific benefits to researchers, yet the process and outcomes of collaboration is not without its risks and challenges. The crucial decision to collaborate has both short and long-term implications for the research agenda of most academics, yet relatively little evidence-based reflection on co-authorship is to be found in either the general academic or accounting literature. The aim of this paper is therefore to provide foundational insights into accounting journal article co-authorship, including the diversity and commonality of its processes, and their conditioning contexts. Based on interviews with 76 academics from 67 universities in the US, UK, mainland Europe and Australasia, who, in the 2011 calendar year, published their research in seven internationally esteemed accounting research journals, our findings point to productivity or social predilections of researchers driving their decision to co-author, as well as in their evaluation of the benefits and costs they have experienced in co-authoring. Interpreted from the vantage point of Social Exchange Theory, these findings lead to a broad classification of co-authorship styles, each with implications for both early career researchers as well as more experienced academics, in terms of the propensity to foster more satisfactory working relationships, and effectiveness of research outcomes.
... Co-authorship ratio= #Co-Authored Publications__________ #Single-Authored Pubs + #Co-Authored Pubs Ratio greater than 0.5 = more co-authored than single authored publications Ratio of less than 0.5 = more single-authored than co-authored publications (Sutter & Kocher, 2004). ...
One of the most controversial issues, in a multidisciplinary area, is information theory. The American Heritage Science Dictionary (2014) defines information theory as “a branch of mathematics that mathematically defines and analyzes the concept of information, statistics and probability theory, and applications include the design of systems that have to do with data transmission, encryption, compression, and information processing and deeply affected many fields.” It has a fundamental contribution to make in multiple disciplines, such as mathematics, statistics, computer science, physics, neurobiology, communication theory, information science, economics, and electrical engineering. Indeed, information theory played a crucial role to achieve many pertinent scientific missions and inventions such as Voyager, Mobile phone, and Internet.
... Co-authorship ratio= #Co-Authored Publications__________ #Single-Authored Pubs + #Co-Authored Pubs Ratio greater than 0.5 = more co-authored than single authored publications Ratio of less than 0.5 = more single-authored than co-authored publications (Sutter & Kocher, 2004). ...
SLIS Connecting 4(1), Spring/Summer 2015:
"Does Family Matter: The Parental Roles of Young Adult Media"
Antoinette Giamalva;
"United Kingdom Libraries during World War II" Matthew Leavitt;
"Academic and Public Libraries’ Use of Web 2.0 Applications and Services in Mississippi" Kalah Rogers;
“'Information Theory' Research Trend: A Bibliometric Approach"
Maryam Asadi
... Hollis (2001) shows that the increased tendency towards collaboration among economists might be favourable with respect to the length and the quality of research articles, whereas it lowers the number of articles by each researcher if each article is weighted with the number of authors. Sutter andKocher (2004) confirm Hollis' (2001) results with respect to the quality of articles. ...
... Additionally, other literature shows that collaboration between different actors does not increase scientometric performance (Lee and Bozeman, 2005;Duque et al., 2005), including co-authorship studies in management and economics (Avkiran, 1997;Krichel and Bakkalbasi, 2006;Ramos et al., 2007;Sutter and Kocher, 2004). ...
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to empirically evaluate the effect of heterogeneity in inter‐organizational collaboration networks on international high‐quality scientific performance of the most reputed business management schools in Latin America according to AméricaEconomía ranking.
Design/methodology/approach
Starting from the debate between advantages and disadvantages of heterogeneity in scientific performance framed in the debate between organizational population ecology and organizational institutionalism theories, this research explores the relationship between heterogeneity, reputation and the most important features for doing research. Using a binomial negative regression, the paper evaluates the partial effect of those variables in the count of scientific production.
Findings
There is an isomorphical tendency from the most reputed schools to establish heterogeneous networks, showing empirical evidence to normative proposals from Latin America, specially formulated in the light of Sabato triangle. Also there are differentiations between schools in aspects like human capital, double‐degree agreements, and schools’ trajectories.
Research limitations/implications
It is necessary to choose a wider sample of schools and to include Latin American journals. The study of diversity (between researchers) and its relationship with heterogeneity (between organizations) is also needed.
Practical implications
The research shows that elite business management schools in Latin America that present better performance also present high levels of heterogeneity in their inter‐organizational collaboration. Therefore, the promotion of heterogeneity could enhance scientific performance and improve techno‐economical networks.
Social implications
This research hopes to aim the research policy design to be able to steer and promote heterogeneity that could improve the relationship between producers and users of knowledge.
Originality/value
The relationships between reputation, heterogeneity, and scientific performance in administration in Latin America had not been addressed empirically. The worth of this research is the empirical confirmation to the advantages of heterogeneity, rather than intellectual capital features of schools, in research collaboration that contribute to the debate about heterogeneity and performance.
... Just like other disciplines, Economics too has been witnessing increasing trends towards co-authored articles (Barnett et al. 1988;Piette and Ross 1992;Hollis 2001;Sutter and Kocher 2004). Two specific questions are commonly explored: that there is a relationship between co-authorship and research productivity of academic economists (Hollis 2001) and whether internationally co-authored papers in economics have received more citations than locally co-authored papers (Schmoch and Schubert 2008). ...
This study examines the research performance and international research collaborations (IRC) of ASEAN nations in the area of economics. Over the last 3 decades international collaborated papers have increased in the region, while locally-co-authored papers have declined. Singapore towered among ASEAN nations in research efficiency based on geographical area, population and GDP. Vietnam performed relatively better in research efficiency than research productivity (number of papers produced), while Indonesia performed poorly. Overall, internationally co-authored papers were cited twice as often as locally authored papers except that both The Philippines and Indonesia exhibited almost no difference in how their local and internationally co-authored papers were cited. The study also examined IRC from the perspective of social networks. Centrality had a strong correlation with research performance; however, vertex tie-strength (a result of repeat collaboration) showed maximum correlation with research performance. While Malaysia emerged as the nation with the highest betweenness centrality or 'bridging' power, the US emerged as the most favoured international partner of ASEAN nations. However, collaboration between ASEAN countries accounted for just 4 % of all international collaborations. Increased academic mobility and more joint scientific works are suggestions to consider to boost educational co-operation among the ASEAN nations.
... Shared authorship was not identified as a strong disincentive to MDR. This could reflect the trend over time toward multiple authored papers in economics and applied economics (Sutter and Kocher, 2004) and the low monetary disincentive for adding additional authors (Hilmer and Hilmer, 2005). ...
We detail the rewards and barriers to participating in multidisciplinary research (MDR) using a 2011 survey of applied economists at U.S. universities. We compare these findings with an earlier 1993 survey to assess if rewards and barriers have changed over time. Different administrative levels of U.S. universities are sending contradictory signals regarding rewards from MDR. External funding agencies convey positive signals. Although the scope and breadth of questions addressed by applied economists are changing over time, institutional incentives and reward structures are not keeping pace with these changes. Progress toward adapting to new professional demands has been slow.
... Simply being a researcher of better quality may well account for Ellison's findings. The quality argument may also underlines Kocher and Sutter's (2004) findings; economic theories abound that capture the idea that high-skilled individuals complement each other far more than low-skilled individuals complement highskilled ones, hence resulting in the tendency of top-skilled individuals to be matched together in equilibrium. The O-ring theory of Michael Kremer (1993), and matching in the marriage market (Gary S. Becker, 1981), are two examples for such positive assortative matching. ...
We propose a theory that captures the interplay between incentives and performance in teams, where peer-effects are present, focusing on the case of research departments within academic institutions. Building on the notion of threshold externalities, our model traces the dynamic evolution of two separated regimes; one in which quality dominates and peer-effects are intensive, and the other in which quantity substitutes quality and peer-effects are weak. In both regimes, promotion standards are determined endogenously. In the presence of myopic behavior, the existence of an intergenerational human capital externality is not internalized, and the bifurcation is determined completely by initial conditions. With positive assortative matching, the existence of a competitive market for academics perpetuates rather than assists the disentanglement from the poverty trap regime. We provide empirical evidence which lend support to the theory.
The aim of this paper is to analyze the effects of the diffusion of ICTs in general and the internet penetration in particular on scientific production in developing countries. We capture the scientific production by the number of scientific journals papers published and the number of patents filed by residents of these countries. The panel of data collected on 70 developing countries over the period 2000-2016, allowed us to estimate a model by the method of generalized moments in system. The results show that improving the access to internet in countries increases the productivity of researchers. Also, the results suggest that democracy and transparency of administrations increase researchers' productivity, while corruption, conflicts and mining rents reduce it.
An important trend in knowledge generation and diffusion is that the co-authorship of research publications has become remarkably more frequent. In this paper we study the role of co-authorship networks for starting and maintaining research collaborations. Relying on the network of the IMF’s Working Papers—which reflects well the endogenous nature of research collaborations—we document the presence of many authors with few direct co-authors, yet indirectly connected through short co-authorship chains. Two researchers are more likely to team up if their distance in the existing network is shorter, arguably reflecting reduced matching frictions. In addition, productive authors and authors with different co-author network sizes collaborate more, because of synergies between senior and junior researchers. Being employed in the same department and having citizenship of the same region also influence the decision to collaborate. We argue that incentives should be directed to researcher pairs that are initially more distant from each other in the co-authorship network.
We analyse the production and networks of Nobel laureates in Economics, employing the Normalized Impact Factor (NIF) of their publications in the Journal of Citation Report (Economics), to identify the academic leaders among those laureates awarded between 1969 and 2016. Our results indicate that direct collaborations among laureates are, in general, rare, but when we add all the co-authors of the laureates, there appears a very large component containing 70% of the nodes, so that more than two thirds of the laureates can be connected through only two steps. Deaton, Tirole, Arrow, and Stiglitz are identified as leaders according to the total production of their respective networks.
Es ist ein bekanntes Phänomen, dass die Anzahl der Koautoren in der Volkswirtschaftslehre in
den letzten drei Jahrzehnten zugenommen hat. Der Artikel zeigt auf der Basis des bisher größten
Datensatzes in der Literatur, dass es einen fortbleibenden Trend zu mehr Koautoren pro Artikel
gibt, der wahrscheinlich auch in Zukunft anhalten wird.
Structured abstract
Purpose– The paper aims to provide information about the structure of collaborative work among Argentinian economics. The study provides specific applied research of social network analysis focus on this profession in this specific country.
Design/methodology/approach– The contribution opted for applying social network analysis tools to papers presented in a congress and published in its proceedings. We focus in detecting main actors, groups of coauthorship, professionals acting as bridges between groups, and differences between genders.
Findings– The paper provides empirical insights about how coauthorship has evolved between Argentine economists. I find that structural properties of the network, main actors, both male and female, main universities or center that affiliates them, a gender gap that might be closing out.
Research limitations/implications– The paper focus on the network for the period 1964-2014 without a more detailed dynamics. It also does not explain main topics worked by the authors.
Practical implications– The work provides knowledge about how groups are created in Economics in Argentina, how cooperation has evolved and what has been the role of women in this development. It also shows how different department and entities collaborates with diverse success in the creation of new knowledge in Economics in Argentina.
Originality/value– The paper works with data from a source of information non-previously studied and contributes in explaining a particular type of collaborative work in a profession in Argentina.
Despite a growing interest in research collaboration, few studies have examined the influences of policy measures on collaboration practices and on the scientific outcome of the research. By analyzing individual-level panel data of researchers in humanities and social sciences in a Korean university, the present study shows that adopting a partial discount system for the number of coauthors, which has been designed in such a way as to reward coauthored publications, could redirect researchers’ attention away from working alone to collaborating with others, as proposed by advocates of team-based incentives in principal–agent theory. In addition, the present study shows that, although collaboration was positively correlated with the impact factors of the journal and the total number of publications, the fractional count of publications, which divides the number of publications by the number of authors, showed a negative relationship with participation in collaboration.
We detail the rewards and barriers to participating in multidisciplinary research (MDR) using a 2011 survey of applied economists at U.S. universities. We compare these findings with an earlier 1993 survey to assess if rewards and barriers have changed over time. Different administrative levels of U.S. universities are sending contradictory signals regarding rewards from MDR. External funding agencies convey positive signals. Although the scope and breadth of questions addressed by applied economists are changing over time, institutional incentives and reward structures are not keeping pace with these changes. Progress toward adapting to new professional demands has been slow.
This research links and extends studies in the business and economics disciplines on factors that affect author ordering and co-authorship in research papers to the real estate discipline. Author ordering measured by alphabetic ordering is associated with journal quality, the number of authors on a paper, the rank of the authors' institutional affiliations, and the authors' domiciles. Having a European co-author increases the likelihood of alphabetic author ordering. Within the real estate discipline, alphabetic author ordering becomes more common over time. Also, similar to the pattern from other disciplines, the percentage of co-authored real estate papers increases over the 17-year period investigated. Of the nine journals assessed, the three core business oriented academic real estate journals-Real Estate Economics, Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, and Journal of Real Estate Research-have the highest percentage of co-authored papers, as would be expected from the top tier of academic journals.
This study provides an overview of the research output of Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India, in terms of number of publications contributed by faculty members and researchers. The study analyzes bibliometric indicators of published research of Jawaharlal Nehru University as indexed in the Web of Science. There were 5,007 research publications from Jawaharlal Nehru University in the four decades from 1971–2010 (70s; 80s; 90s; and 2000s). The study noted encouraging trends in collaborative research work with multiple-authored research papers. International collaboration in research was also observed among the faculty members and researchers. English was the predominant language of communication. The social scientists and humanists of Jawaharlal Nehru University publish books which are not indexed in the Web of Science. Similarly, research work published in regional languages or published in national level journals are seldom included in the Web of Science. It suggests that research needs to be done by collecting data from the Indian Citation Index and books published by the researchers in order to get an accurate and consolidated picture of the research output of the university.
This paper examines patterns, antecedents, and effects of (international) cooperation in accounting academia based on 7105 papers published in 15 leading accounting journals. In particular, we investigate the dissemination of different forms of cooperation, identify author characteristics that are related to the propensity of cooperation and analyze whether cooperation is associated with research performance (in terms of research impact and output). We find that scholars from Asian countries tend to be more heavily involved in international cooperation than researchers from most European countries and the USA. A Ph.D. from a leading school, a scholar's previous publication experience and a past appointment as editor or editorial board member are positively associated with the propensity for cooperation, while a researcher's current affiliation has only limited impact. Surprisingly, our findings show that cooperation is not related to a greater research impact as measured by citation numbers per paper. Finally, we find a significant negative relationship between a scholar's share of co-authored papers and his or her research output in leading accounting journals as measured by the weighted numbers of papers per author.
Increased specialization and extensive collaboration are common behaviours in the scientific community, as well as the evaluation of scientific research based on bibliometric indicators. This paper aims to analyse the effect of collaboration (co-authorship) on the scientific output of Italian economists. We use social network analysis to investigate the structure of co-authorship, and econometric analysis to explain the productivity of individual Italian economists, in terms of ‘attributional’ variables (such as age, gender, academic position, tenure, scientific sub-discipline, geographical location), ‘relational’ variables (such as propensity to cooperate and the stability of cooperation patterns) and ‘positional’ variables (such as betweenness and closeness centrality indexes and clustering coefficients).
This study examines the relationship between exposure to the Internet and changes in collaboration patterns across institutional and national borders. The number of years that have elapsed since an institution’s adoption of a domain name (
Dns
) is used as a proxy for Internet exposure. This proxy is then matched with institutional data on all published papers indexed by
Isi
for over 1,200
Us
four-year colleges, universities and medical schools for the years 1991–2007. The publication data examined cover the social sciences and natural sciences and narrower fields such as economics and biology. Two measures of institutional collaboration are examined : (1) percent of papers produced by a
Us
institution with one or more coauthors at another
Us
institution (
Us
-
Us
) ; and (2) percent of papers produced by a
Us
institution with one or more non-
Us
coauthors (
Us
-
Intl
). Results indicate dramatic growth in the percentage of both
Us
-
Us
and
Us
-
Intl
collaborations, as well as important differences by field. The study provides modest evidence that length of exposure to the Internet has had a positive and significant effect on both
Us
-
Us
and
Us
-
Intl
collaborations.
Academic competition and network externalities in scientific production: An econometric study on French economists
This paper studies the determinants of scientific productivity from an original database of French academic economists observed in 2009 and 2010. All these individuals were involved in the first and second experiences of an academic competition, the “Prime excellence Scientifique”. This tournament was introduced by the French academic system to select best publishers. For this competition, the scientific productivity was observed in a same period from 2005 to 2010 and competitors are selected and ranked by their relative performance in publications using the same criteria (National Scientific Research Center ranking). We construct a scientific production index and estimate productivity regressions using quantile regression. We control for individual characteristics, environmental context, initial publication performance (h index), in line with stylized facts and theoretical foundations like Lotka law and scientific life cycle productivity. The paper brings two novel dimensions in the literature. The first is done by controlling for the multi-task activities of tenure and associated professor when evaluating their scientific production. The second outcome of the paper consists to evaluate the impact of network spillover externalities induced by local competences accumulated in economics departments on each individual performance.
This paper looks at the growth of multiple-authored papers in eight leading economics journals. In 1950, multiple authorship was a relative rarity. By the 1990s, it had become commonplace. An empirical analysis suggests that this growth has not been even over time but appears to have been greatest in the mid-1960s and again since the mid-1970s. Possible reasons for this growth include developments in computer technology. Its implications for the economics profession are briefly discussed. Copyright 1996 by American Economic Association.
The rising incidence of co-authorship in economics has been well documented. This study builds on earlier work by using less aggregate data to test various hypotheses about the causes of this rise. Evidence presented here provides corroboration for the hypothesis that increasing opportunities for specialization have arisen in economics, leading to an increase in co-authorship. We also find strong evidence supporting two other causes--the increasing opportunity cost of time and the rising incentive to diversify against the uncertainty of the editorial review process. The evidence presented here does not support the hypothesis that increased co-authorship has arisen in response to higher quality standards as a result of increased competition for journal space.
Economics departments in the United States are ranked based on the number of pages published in thirty-six economics journals, publications in five of the top journals, output per faculty member, and an index of the concentration of research in a department. Evidence shows that the top twenty departments have generally retained their positions since the 1970s but rather large changes have occurred in departments ranked from 240 to 100. An 'Economists Hall of Fame' is developed listing the top fifty individual producers of research in the thirty-six journal set and the top five journals. Copyright 1996 by Oxford University Press.
A cohort sample of Ph.D. economists indicates a significant propensity for researchers to select coauthors of the same sex. This gender-sorting contributes to lower article production for women. Further, the authors find evidence of bias in academic promotion when single-authored and coauthored articles carry the same weight in promotion and salary decisions. The evidence explains, in part, why women academics wait longer for promotion and are not as likely to be promoted as men. Among the effects of gender-sorting is self-selection of women into larger departments where they are more likely to find colleagues of the same sex. Copyright 1992 by Oxford University Press.
This paper examines data on the institutional backgrounds of editors and authors of the top thirty economics journals, identified by their 1995 citation impact. It is revealed, for example, that 70.8 percent of the journal editors were located in the United States and twelve U.S. universities accounted for the location of more than 38.9 percent. Concerning journal article authors, 65.7 percent were located in U.S. institutions and twelve U.S. universities accounted for 21.8 percent. Arguably, the degree of institutional and geographical concentration of editors and authors may be unhealthy for innovative research in economics.
This paper addresses the institutional concentration of authors in 15 top economics journals from 1977 to 1997. The concentration of authors' PhD affiliations is substantially higher than the concentration of authors' current affiliations. Relating input indicators, such as population, number of universities with economics departments, or manpower in economics, to publication output reduces the US dominance considerably, whereas Israel and the United Kingdom come out excellently. Exporters and importers of PhDs among universities are identified. Concentration ratios like the Herfindahl-Index lack a clear time trend. Nevertheless, the position of the United States has been weakening in recent years.
- Wei S.