The personal factors in scientific collaboration: views held by Slovenian researchers

Scientific collaboration (SC) has become a widespread feature of modern research work. While many social network studies address various aspects of SC, little attention has so far been given to the specific factors that motivate researchers to engage in SC at the individual level. In our article, we focus on the types and practices of SC that researchers in Slovenia engage in. We consider this topic by adopting a quantitative and qualitative methodological approach. The former was conducted through a web survey among active researchers, and the latter through in-depth interviews with a selected group of top researchers, i.e. intellectual leaders. Results show the extent of individual SC depends on the perceptions of researchers of the benefits of SC. Qualitative interviews additionally provide broader reflections on certain policy mechanisms that could better motivate Slovenian scientists to scientifically collaborate in the international arena.

[1]  Aaron M. Shew,et al.  Preparing the next generation of sustainability scientists , 2018 .

[2]  Luka Kronegger,et al.  With whom do researchers collaborate and why? , 2017, Scientometrics.

[3]  Jan L. Youtie,et al.  Trouble in Paradise: Problems in Academic Research Co-authoring , 2015, Science and Engineering Ethics.

[4]  Branco Ponomariov,et al.  What is co-authorship? , 2016, Scientometrics.

[5]  M. Parker,et al.  Good and Bad Research Collaborations: Researchers’ Views on Science and Ethics in Global Health Research , 2016, PloS one.

[6]  Jan Youtie,et al.  Research collaboration experiences, good and bad: Dispatches from the front lines , 2016 .

[7]  Thomas Boyer-Kassem,et al.  Scientific Collaboration: Do Two Heads Need to Be More than Twice Better than One? , 2015, Philosophy of Science.

[8]  Franc Mali,et al.  Why an Unbiased External R&D Evaluation System is Important for the Progress of Social Sciences—the Case of a Small Social Science Community , 2013 .

[9]  Jonathan Adams.  Collaborations: The fourth age of research , 2013, Nature.

[10]  Benjamin Y. Clark,et al.  Investments in Scientific Research: Examining the Funding Threshold Effects on Scientific Collaborat , 2012 .

[11]  S. Holgate.  How to Collaborate , 2012 .

[12]  Liv Langfeldt,et al.  Integration modes in EU research: Centrifugality versus coordination of national research policies , 2012 .

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

[14]  Sergio L. Toral Marín,et al.  An Exploratory Social Network Analysis of Academic Research Networks , 2011, 2011 Third International Conference on Intelligent Networking and Collaborative Systems.

[15]  Ali Gazni,et al.  Investigating different types of research collaboration and citation impact: a case study of Harvard University’s publications , 2011, Scientometrics.

[16]  A. Ferligoj,et al.  On the dynamics of national scientific systems , 2011 .

[17]  Luka Kronegger,et al.  Co-authorship trends and collaboration patterns in the Slovenian sociological community , 2010 .

[18]  G. Hickey,et al.  Evaluating the social capital accrued in large research networks: The case of the Sustainable Forest Management Network (1995-2009) , 2010 .

[19]  Massimo Franceschet,et al.  The effect of scholar collaboration on impact and quality of academic papers , 2010, J. Informetrics.

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

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

[22]  Ernesto de los Reyes López,et al.  Dimensions of scientific collaboration and its contribution to the academic research groups' scientific quality , 2009 .

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

[24]  Caroline S. Wagner,et al.  Mapping the network of global science: comparing international co-authorships from 1990 to 2000 , 2005 .

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

[26]  Robert A. Campbell,et al.  Preparing the Next Generation of Scientists , 2003 .

[27]  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..

[28]  Peter M. Bentler,et al.  Structural Equation Modeling , 2003 .

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

[30]  Denis O. Gray,et al.  Industry–University Research Centers: A Multivariate Analysis of Member Retention , 2001 .

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

[32]  Ari-Pekka Hameri,et al.  A framework of motivations for industry-big science collaboration: A case study , 1996 .

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

[34]  Stanley Presser,et al.  Collaboration and the Quality of Research , 1980 .

[35]  R. Merton,et al.  The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations , 1973 .

[36]  Scientific Elite , 2020, Encyclopedia of Creativity, Invention, Innovation and Entrepreneurship.

[37]  Joon-Oh Park,et al.  The Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge , 2014 .

[38]  Daniel L. Fay,et al.  Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art , 2013 .

[39]  Luka Kronegger,et al.  Dynamic Scientific Co-Authorship Networks , 2012 .

[40]  Diana Mîndril,et al.  Maximum Likelihood (ML) and Diagonally Weighted Least Squares (DWLS) Estimation Procedures: A Comparison of Estimation Bias with Ordinal and Multivariate Non-Normal Data , 2010 .

[41]  Stephen M. Ritchie,et al.  Studying research collaboration , 2007 .

[42]  Jeremy P. Birnholtz,et al.  When do researchers collaborate? Toward a model of collaboration propensity , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[43]  Diane H. Sonnenwald,et al.  Factors that Impact Interdisciplinary Natural Science Research Collaboration in Academia 1 , 2005 .

[44]  Robert J. W. Tijssen,et al.  Measuring and Evaluating Science—Technology Connections and Interactions , 2004 .

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

[46]  Monica Gaughan,et al.  Scientific and technical human capital: an alternative model for research evaluation , 2001, Int. J. Technol. Manag..

[47]  G. Melin.  Pragmatism and self-organization: Research collaboration on the individual level , 2000 .

[48]  Dean Keith Simonton,et al.  Creative productivity: A predictive and explanatory model of career trajectories and landmarks. , 1997 .

[49]  James W. Endersby.  Collaborative research in the social sciences : Multiple authorship and publication credit , 1996 .

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

[51]  R. Whitley.  The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences (Second Edition: with new introductory chapter entitled 'Science Transformed? The Changing Nature of Knowledge Production at the End of the Twentieth Century') , 1984 .

[52]  D. Beaver,et al.  Studies in scientific collaboration - Part II. Scientific co-authorship, research productivity and visibility in the French scientific elite, 1799-1830 , 1979, Scientometrics.

[53]  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 .