Co-authorship trends and collaboration patterns in the Slovenian sociological community

The article deals with some processes generating increases in research collaboration; one of the most characteristic tendencies of modern science. The major empirical focus is the increasing tendency to co-authorship in sociological publications in Slovenia. Bibliometric analyses, based on two joint national research information systems (SICRIS and COBISS), show the amount of co- authored publications in the field of sociology have increased over the last two decades. Blockmodeling of co-authorship networks in sociology has shown that sociologists who are not systematically tied to strongly connected and well- established research groups produce the best scientific publications in their field.

[1]  Luka Kronegger,et al.  Collaboration structures in Slovenian scientific communities , 2012, Scientometrics.

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

[3]  Marko A. Rodriguez,et al.  On the relationship between the structural and socioacademic communities of a coauthorship network , 2008, J. Informetrics.

[4]  J. Rigby.  Handcrafted by 16 men: The impact of single and multiple authorship in collaborative research networks , 2005 .

[5]  Donald de B. Beaver,et al.  Reflections on Scientific Collaboration (and its study): Past, Present, and Future , 2001, Scientometrics.

[6]  Donald de B. Beaver,et al.  Does collaborative research have greater epistemic authority? , 2004, Scientometrics.

[7]  W. Cleveland.  Robust Locally Weighted Regression and Smoothing Scatterplots , 1979 .

[8]  Norman Kaplan,et al.  The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations , 1974 .

[9]  Donald de B. Beaver,et al.  Studies in scientific collaboration , 2005, Scientometrics.

[10]  N. Mullins,et al.  NETWORK ANALYSIS IN THE STUDY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY , 1988 .

[11]  Stefan Hornbostel.  Wissenschaftsindikatoren : Bewertungen in der Wissenschaft , 1997 .

[12]  M. Kendall,et al.  The Logic of Scientific Discovery. , 1959 .

[13]  Kam C. Chan,et al.  Marketing Journal Coauthorships: An Empirical Analysis of Coauthor Behavior , 2006 .

[14]  Wesley Shrum,et al.  Structures of scientific collaboration , 2007 .

[15]  N. Haslam,et al.  Early-career scientific achievement and patterns of authorship: the mixed blessings of publication leadership and collaboration , 2009 .

[16]  Edward J. Wegman,et al.  Social networks of author-coauthor relationships , 2008, Comput. Stat. Data Anal..

[17]  J. S. Katz,et al.  What is research collaboration , 1997 .

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

[19]  D. Pontille,et al.  Authorship Practices and Institutional Contexts in Sociology: Elements for a Comparison of the United States and France , 2003 .

[20]  K. Brad Wray,et al.  Scientific authorship in the age of collaborative research , 2006 .

[21]  E. Leahey,et al.  Collaborative Research in Sociology: Trends and Contributing Factors , 2008 .

[22]  G. Laudel.  What do we measure by co-authorships? , 2002 .

[23]  Juan D. Rogers,et al.  Obstacles and opportunities in the application of network analysis to the evaluation of R&D , 2001 .

[24]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  Inflationary bibliometric values: The role of scientific collaboration and the need for relative indicators in evaluative studies , 2004, Scientometrics.

[25]  J. Ziman.  Real Science: What It Is and What It Means , 2000 .

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

[27]  J. Moody.  The Structure of a Social Science Collaboration Network: Disciplinary Cohesion from 1963 to 1999 , 2004 .

[28]  O. Persson,et al.  Understanding Patterns of International Scientific Collaboration , 1992 .

[29]  A. Kramberger,et al.  An evaluation system of the Science and international orientation of Social Scientists: the case of Slovenia , 2010 .

[30]  W. Glänzel,et al.  Analysing Scientific Networks Through Co-Authorship , 2004 .

[31]  Steven Shapin,et al.  A Social History of Truth: Civility and Science in Seventeenth-Century England. , 1995 .

[32]  M. Newman,et al.  The structure of scientific collaboration networks. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[33]  J. De Haan,et al.  Authorship patterns in Dutch sociology , 1997, Scientometrics.

[34]  D. Price,et al.  Studies in Scientometrics I Transience and Continuance in Scientific Authorship , 1975 .

[35]  Blaise Cronin,et al.  Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices? , 2001, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[36]  Francis T. Cullen,et al.  How Many Authors Does It Take to Publish an Article? Trends and Patterns in Political Science , 1998, PS: Political Science & Politics.

[37]  Robert D. Tollison,et al.  Intellectual Collaboration , 2000, Journal of Political Economy.

[38]  Olle Persson,et al.  Studying research collaboration using co-authorships , 1996, Scientometrics.

[39]  Vladimir Batagelj,et al.  Generalized blockmodeling , 2005, Structural analysis in the social sciences.

[40]  Mark S. Granovetter.  The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[41]  R. Tijssen,et al.  Research collaboration at a distance: Changing spatial patterns of scientific collaboration within Europe , 2010 .

[42]  Leo Egghe,et al.  Little science, big science... and beyond , 1994, Scientometrics.

[43]  Gary James Jason,et al.  The Logic of Scientific Discovery , 1988 .

[44]  Andreas Pyka,et al.  Innovation Networks. New Approaches in Modelling and Analyzing , 2005 .

[45]  I. Arminen,et al.  Scientific Productivity, Web Visibility and Citation Patterns in Sixteen Nordic Sociology Departments , 2008 .

[46]  D. Hicks.  The Four Literatures of Social Science , 2004 .

[47]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Network Structure, Self-Organization and the Growth of International Collaboration in Science.Research Policy, 34(10), 2005, 1608-1618. , 2005, 0911.4299.