Differences in Collaboration Patterns across Discipline, Career Stage, and Gender

Collaboration plays an increasingly important role in promoting research productivity and impact. What remains unclear is whether female and male researchers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematical (STEM) disciplines differ in their collaboration propensity. Here, we report on an empirical analysis of the complete publication records of 3,980 faculty members in six STEM disciplines at select U.S. research universities. We find that female faculty have significantly fewer distinct co-authors over their careers than males, but that this difference can be fully accounted for by females’ lower publication rate and shorter career lengths. Next, we find that female scientists have a lower probability of repeating previous co-authors than males, an intriguing result because prior research shows that teams involving new collaborations produce work with higher impact. Finally, we find evidence for gender segregation in some sub-disciplines in molecular biology, in particular in genomics where we find female faculty to be clearly under-represented.

[1]  Anna Danielsson,et al.  Masculinities and experimental practices in physics: The view from three case studies , 2016 .

[2]  B. Gray,et al.  Toward a Comprehensive Theory of Collaboration , 1991 .

[3]  Jennifer L. Berdahl,et al.  Men, Women, and Leadership Centralization in Groups Over Time. , 2005 .

[4]  Konrad P. Körding,et al.  A high-reproducibility and high-accuracy method for automated topic classification , 2014, ArXiv.

[5]  Murrey G. Olmsted,et al.  U.S. News & World Report 2010/11 Best Hospitals Rankings Methodology , 2010 .

[6]  G. Ahuja Collaboration Networks, Structural Holes, and Innovation: A Longitudinal Study , 1998 .

[7]  R. Guimerà,et al.  Functional cartography of complex metabolic networks , 2005, Nature.

[8]  J. McDowell,et al.  THE EFFECT OF GENDER‐SORTING ON PROPENSITY TO COAUTHOR: IMPLICATIONS FOR ACADEMIC PROMOTION , 1992 .

[9]  Yu Xie,et al.  Sex differences in research productivity : New evidence about an old puzzle , 1998 .

[10]  Kara L. Hall,et al.  The science of team science: overview of the field and introduction to the supplement. , 2008, American journal of preventive medicine.

[11]  R. J. FIFIELD,et al.  Science for All , 1967, Nature.

[12]  Carl T. Bergstrom,et al.  The Role of Gender in Scholarly Authorship , 2012, PloS one.

[13]  Richard F. Gunst,et al.  Applied Regression Analysis , 1999, Technometrics.

[14]  Rebecca Gajda,et al.  Utilizing Collaboration Theory to Evaluate Strategic Alliances , 2004 .

[15]  Filippo Radicchi,et al.  The Possible Role of Resource Requirements and Academic Career-Choice Risk on Gender Differences in Publication Rate and Impact , 2012, PloS one.

[16]  Benjamin F. Jones,et al.  Supporting Online Material Materials and Methods Figs. S1 to S3 References the Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge , 2022 .

[17]  Katy Börner,et al.  Advancing the Science of Team Science , 2010, Clinical and translational science.

[18]  Svein Kyvik,et al.  Child Care, Research Collaboration, and Gender Differences in Scientific Productivity , 1996 .

[19]  Barry Bozeman,et al.  The Impact of Research Collaboration on Scientific Productivity , 2005 .

[20]  L. Ceriani,et al.  The origins of the Gini index: extracts from Variabilità e Mutabilità (1912) by Corrado Gini , 2012 .

[21]  Elizabeth A. Corley,et al.  Scientists' collaboration strategies: implications for scientific and technical human capital , 2004 .

[22]  Norman R. Draper,et al.  Applied regression analysis (2. ed.) , 1981, Wiley series in probability and mathematical statistics.

[23]  Giovanni Abramo,et al.  Gender differences in research collaboration , 2013, J. Informetrics.

[24]  J. Katzenbach,et al.  The Wisdom of Teams , 2010 .

[25]  D. Meyer,et al.  Supporting Online Material Materials and Methods Som Text Figs. S1 to S6 References Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups , 2022 .

[26]  J. H. Dyer Effective interim collaboration: how firms minimize transaction costs and maximise transaction value , 1997 .

[27]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  Cross-national preference in co-authorship, references and citations , 2006, Scientometrics.

[28]  C. Bart,et al.  Why women make better directors , 2013 .

[29]  Jeffrey H. Dyer EFFECTIVE INTERFIRM COLLABORATION : HOW FIRMS MINIMIZE TRANSACTION COSTS AND MAXIMIZE TRANSACTION VALUE r , 1998 .

[30]  Monica Gaughan,et al.  How do men and women differ in research collaborations? An analysis of the collaborative motives and strategies of academic researchers☆ , 2011 .

[31]  Isabel Gómez,et al.  Local, Domestic and International Scientific Collaboration in Biomedical Research , 1996, Scientometrics.

[32]  David W. Scott,et al.  Multivariate Density Estimation: Theory, Practice, and Visualization , 1992, Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics.

[33]  L. Keller,et al.  Human cooperation in social dilemmas: comparing the Snowdrift game with the Prisoner's Dilemma , 2007, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[34]  N. J. Burnett The productivity puzzle: A 10% solution , 1992 .

[35]  M. Newman Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[36]  Nadine V. Kegen Science Networks in Cutting-edge Research Institutions: Gender Homophily and Embeddedness in Formal and Informal Networks☆ , 2013 .

[37]  Peter J. Fensham,et al.  Science for all: A reflective essay , 1985 .

[38]  Jonathon N. Cummings,et al.  Collaborative Research Across Disciplinary and Organizational Boundaries , 2005 .

[39]  Benjamin F. Jones,et al.  Multi-University Research Teams: Shifting Impact, Geography, and Stratification in Science , 2008, Science.

[40]  D. W. Scott,et al.  Multivariate Density Estimation, Theory, Practice and Visualization , 1992 .

[41]  Stasa Milojevic,et al.  Principles of scientific research team formation and evolution , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[42]  B. Uzzi,et al.  Collaboration and Creativity: The Small World Problem1 , 2005, American Journal of Sociology.

[43]  Giovanni Abramo,et al.  The collaboration behaviors of scientists in Italy: A field level analysis , 2013, J. Informetrics.

[44]  N. Draper,et al.  Applied Regression Analysis: Draper/Applied Regression Analysis , 1998 .

[45]  Jason M. Sheltzer,et al.  Elite male faculty in the life sciences employ fewer women , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[46]  C. Schultz The productivity puzzle. , 1989, Journal of the California Dental Association.

[47]  Charles Henderson,et al.  Gender Discrimination in Physics and Astronomy: Graduate Student Experiences of Sexism and Gender Microaggressions. , 2016 .

[48]  J. Levine,et al.  Collaboration: The Social Context of Theory Development , 2004, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.