Measuring the stability of scientific collaboration

Stability has long been regarded as an important characteristic of many natural and social processes. In regards to scientific collaborations, we define stability to reflect the consistent investment of a certain amount of effort into a relationship. In this paper, we provide an explicit definition of a new indicator of stability, based on the year-to-year publication output of collaborations. We conduct a large-scale analysis of stability among collaborations between authors publishing in the field of computer science. Collaborations with medium–high degree of stability tend to occur most frequently, and on average, have the highest average scientific impact. We explore other “circumstances”, reflecting the composition of collaborators, that may interact with the relationship between stability and impact, and show that (1) Transdisciplinary collaborations with low stability leads to high impact publications; (2) Stable collaboration with the collaborative author pairs showing greater difference in scientific age or career impact can produce high impact publications; and (3) Highly-cited collaborators whose publications have a large number of co-authors do not keep stable collaborations. We also demonstrate how our indicator for stability can be used alongside other similar indicators, such as persistence, to better understand the nature of scientific collaboration, and outline a new taxonomy of collaborations.

[1]  Stefan Schaltegger,et al.  Transdisciplinarity in Corporate Sustainability: Mapping the Field , 2013 .

[2]  O. Grusky,et al.  Managerial Succession and Organizational Effectiveness , 1963, American Journal of Sociology.

[3]  Ruoming Jin,et al.  A Topic Modeling Approach and Its Integration into the Random Walk Framework for Academic Search , 2008, 2008 Eighth IEEE International Conference on Data Mining.

[4]  Sharon E. Straus,et al.  Issues in the Mentor–Mentee Relationship in Academic Medicine: A Qualitative Study , 2009, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[5]  T. Ellingsen,et al.  Stability of linear flow , 1975 .

[6]  Benjamin F. Jones,et al.  Atypical Combinations and Scientific Impact , 2013, Science.

[7]  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.

[8]  Deana D. Pennington,et al.  Transdisciplinary Research , Transformative Learning , and Transformative Science Author ( s ) : , 2013 .

[9]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  UvA-DARE ( Digital Academic Repository ) Citations : Indicators of Quality ? The Impact Fallacy , 2016 .

[10]  Ying Ding,et al.  Discover citation topic distribution patterns of highly cited papers , 2017 .

[11]  Kara L Hall,et al.  The ecology of team science: understanding contextual influences on transdisciplinary collaboration. , 2008, American journal of preventive medicine.

[12]  R. Katz.  The Effects of Group Longevity on Project Communication and Performance. , 1982 .

[13]  Alexander Michael Petersen,et al.  Quantifying the impact of weak, strong, and super ties in scientific careers , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[14]  Elliott Dunlap Smith,et al.  Technology & labor : a study of the human problems of labor saving , 1939 .

[15]  J. Dawson,et al.  It's what you do and the way that you do it: Team task, team size, and innovation-related group processes , 2001 .

[16]  Johanna Hakala,et al.  The future of the academic calling? Junior researchers in the entrepreneurial university , 2009 .

[17]  Ronald Rousseau,et al.  Simulating growth of the h-index , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[18]  D. Eitzen,et al.  Managerial Change, Longevity, and Organizational Effectiveness. , 1972 .

[19]  M. Hannan,et al.  Structural Inertia and Organizational Change , 1984 .

[20]  Antecedents and Consequences of Team Stability on New Product Development Performance , 2002 .

[21]  Giovanni Abramo,et al.  Research collaboration and productivity: is there correlation? , 2009, ArXiv.

[22]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Estimates of the Continuously Publishing Core in the Scientific Workforce , 2014, PloS one.

[23]  Daniel Simberloff,et al.  The “Balance of Nature”—Evolution of a Panchreston , 2014, PLoS biology.

[24]  N. Kerr,et al.  Group performance and decision making. , 2004, Annual review of psychology.

[25]  Ying Ding,et al.  Understanding persistent scientific collaboration , 2018, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[26]  Deana D. Pennington,et al.  Transdisciplinary Research, Transformative Learning, and Transformative Science , 2013 .

[27]  Kasisomayajula Viswanath,et al.  The role of transdisciplinary collaboration in translating and disseminating health research: lessons learned and exemplars of success. , 2008, American journal of preventive medicine.

[28]  Rob Kling,et al.  Not just a matter of time: Field differences and the shaping of electronic media in supporting scientific communication , 1999, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[29]  B. Uzzi,et al.  The Sources and Consequences of Embeddedness for the Economic Performance of Organizations: The Network Effect , 1996 .

[30]  F. Xavier Molina-Morales,et al.  Too much love in the neighborhood can hurt: how an excess of intensity and trust in relationships may produce negative effects on firms , 2009 .

[31]  John P. A. Ioannidis,et al.  More time for research: Fund people not projects , 2011, Nature.

[32]  Richard A. Guzzo,et al.  Teams in organizations: recent research on performance and effectiveness. , 1996, Annual review of psychology.

[33]  S. Milojevic.  Modes of collaboration in modern science: Beyond power laws and preferential attachment , 2010 .

[34]  Richard Van Noorden.  Interdisciplinary research by the numbers , 2015, Nature.

[35]  P. Nystrom,et al.  To Avoid Organizational Crises, Unlearn , 1984 .

[36]  Vincent Larivière,et al.  Team size matters: Collaboration and scientific impact since 1900 , 2014, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[37]  Yan Wu,et al.  Research collaboration and topic trends in Computer Science based on top active authors , 2016, PeerJ Comput. Sci..

[38]  Noriko Hara,et al.  An emerging view of scientific collaboration: Scientists' perspectives on collaboration and factors that impact collaboration , 2003, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[39]  Jie Tang,et al.  ArnetMiner: extraction and mining of academic social networks , 2008, KDD.

[40]  Joon-Oh Park,et al.  The Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge , 2011 .

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

[42]  K. Brad Wray,et al.  The Epistemic Significance of Collaborative Research , 2002, Philosophy of Science.

[43]  L. Bromham,et al.  Interdisciplinary research has consistently lower funding success , 2016, Nature.

[44]  A. M. Fridman,et al.  Physics of Gravitating Systems I: Equilibrium and Stability , 1984 .

[45]  E. Bogomolny,et al.  Stability of Classical Solutions , 1976 .

[46]  J. E. Hirsch,et al.  An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output , 2005, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.

[47]  Johanna Hakala,et al.  Socialization of junior researchers in new academic research environments: two case studies from Finland , 2009 .