Does Scientific Collaboration Increase the Impact of Ecological Articles?

Abstract We examined the effects of different types of collaboration on the citation rates of 837 research papers published in Oecologia from 1998 through 2000. Multiauthored papers had higher annual citation rates, but also higher self-citation rates, than single-authored papers. Interdisciplinary collaboration between institutions increased citation rates, whereas in-house collaboration reduced them. Contrary to our predictions, international collaboration had no effect on the citation rates of ecological papers, and US ecologists benefited from collaboration more than their European colleagues. Altogether, our results indicate that scientific collaboration in ecology has a rather minor effect on the impact of the resulting publications, as measured by their citation rates.

[1]  Helmut A. Abt,et al.  CITATIONS TO SINGLE AND MULTIAUTHORED PAPERS , 1984 .

[2]  Not the first , 1990, Nature.

[3]  ANDERS PAPE Møller.  National citations , 1990, Nature.

[4]  Lawrence B. Slobodkin,et al.  A Critique for Ecology , 1991 .

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

[6]  Vincent H. Resh,et al.  International collaboration in freshwater ecology , 1994 .

[7]  Benno Müller-Hill,et al.  Quality and efficiency of basic research in molecular biology: a bibliometric analysis of thirteen excellent research institutes , 1995 .

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

[9]  Ronald Rousseau,et al.  Are multi-authored articles cited more than single-authored ones? Are collaborations with authors from other countries more cited than collaborations within the country? A case study. , 2001 .

[10]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  Coauthorship Patterns and Trends in the Sciences (1980-1998): A Bibliometric Study With Implications for Database Indexing and Search Strategies , 2002, Libr. Trends.

[11]  Tom Tregenza,et al.  Gender bias in the refereeing process , 2002 .

[12]  D. Aksnes.  CHARACTERISTICS OF HIGHLY CITED PAPERS , 2003 .

[13]  D. King.  The scientific impact of nations , 2004, Nature.

[14]  Tony Dale,et al.  Science from the periphery: Collaboration, networks and 'Periphery Effects' in the citation of New Zealand Crown Research Institutes articles, 1995-2000 , 2003, Scientometrics.

[15]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations , 2004, Scientometrics.

[16]  D. A. King,et al.  The Scientific Impact of Nations: What different countries get for their research spending , 2004 .

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

[18]  M. Bridgstock,et al.  The quality of single and multiple authored papers; An unresolved problem , 1991, Scientometrics.

[19]  John C. Smart,et al.  Author collaboration and impact: A note on citation rates of single and multiple authored articles , 1986, Scientometrics.

[20]  S. M. Lawani,et al.  Some bibliometric correlates of quality in scientific research , 2005, Scientometrics.

[21]  Henk F. Moed,et al.  International scientific co-operation and awareness within the European community: Problems and perspectives , 1991, Scientometrics.

[22]  J. Koricheva,et al.  What determines the citation frequency of ecological papers? , 2005, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[23]  H. Herbertz,et al.  Does it pay to cooperate? A bibliometric case study in molecular biology , 1995, Scientometrics.

[24]  Francis Narin,et al.  Scientific co-operation in Europe and the citation of multinationally authored papers , 1991, Scientometrics.

[25]  Diana Hicks,et al.  How much is a collaboration worth? A calibrated bibliometric model , 1997, Scientometrics.

[26]  Necmi Kemal Avkiran,et al.  Scientific collaboration in finance does not lead to better quality research , 2006, Scientometrics.