Collaborative research: opinions and information technology utilization potential

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, to study collaborative research in general and identify its characteristics, advantages and disadvantages by conglomerating various views and ideas from the literature and from expert opinion research. Second, to determine the importance of and attitudes toward the usage of information technology (IT) in collaborative research projects. Design/methodology/approach - Initially, an extensive literature review and ten in-depth interviews have been conducted to determine the identifying characteristics of collaborative research. Consequently, a questionnaire is used as the major data collection tool to assess academicians' opinions about collaborative research and attitudes toward IT utilization in such studies. Findings - Collaborative research has been most distinctively defined with the concepts of teamwork, knowledge and experience sharing and direct and continuous communication. Increased visibility and recognition of such projects and enhanced access to various resources have also been pinpointed as important advantages. Academicians have shown a highly positive tendency to utilize IT and adopt IT tools that will enhance convenience and communication and contribute to the conduction of various basic and support processes of collaborative research projects. Research limitations/implications - The major implication of this research is the general need for more collaborative research projects in academia and the necessity to develop and employ various IT tools that can be used in such studies. Similar studies can be done with larger sample sizes or across various contexts, for comparative purposes, to overcome the limitations of the study. Originality/value - In this paper, the dispersed literature about collaborative research has been assembled and a unified scope has been drawn around the concept. Attitudes toward collaborative research and the potential value of utilizing IT in such projects, which has been studied at an inadequate level in the literature, have been evaluated comprehensively from the perspective of academicians.

[1]  Pietro Gambadauro,et al.  Office 2.0: a web 2.0 tool for international collaborative research , 2008, The Lancet.

[2]  M. D. Gordon,et al.  A critical reassessment of inferred relations between multiple authorship, scientific collaboration, the production of papers and their acceptance for publication , 1980, Scientometrics.

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

[4]  M. Galinsky,et al.  Confronting the Reality of Collaborative Practice Research: Issues of Practice, Design, Measurement, and Team Development , 1993 .

[5]  Role of formal boundary spanning structure and changing pattern of university-industry collaborative research in University of Tokyo , 2008, PICMET '08 - 2008 Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering & Technology.

[6]  Peter Brezany,et al.  Portals for collaborative research communities: two distinguished case studies , 2011, Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exp..

[7]  G. Simpson,et al.  Research as an impetus to improved treatment. , 1980, Archives of general psychiatry.

[8]  Edward A. Lee,et al.  Scientific workflow management and the Kepler system , 2006, Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exp..

[9]  Sang Keun Rhee,et al.  RIKI: A Wiki-Based Knowledge Sharing System for Collaborative Research Projects , 2008, APCHI.

[10]  Anastasia Papazafeiropoulou,et al.  An evaluation framework for Health Information Systems: human, organization and technology-fit factors (HOT-fit) , 2008, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

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

[12]  Shinji Takao.  The effects of narrow-band width multipoint videoconferencing on group decision making and turn distribution , 1999 .

[13]  D. Biordi,et al.  Advantages and disadvantages of collaborative research: a university and behavioral health care provider's experience. , 1998, Archives of Psychiatric Nursing.

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

[15]  Patrick Carmichael.  Extensible Markup Language and Qualitative Data Analysis , 2002 .

[16]  Christine L. Borgman,et al.  What can Studies of e-Learning Teach us about Collaboration in e-Research? Some Findings from Digital Library Studies , 2005, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[17]  D. Levinson,et al.  The work group within the organization: a sociopsychological approach. , 1973, Psychiatry.

[18]  Gabriele Bammer,et al.  Enhancing research collaborations: Three key management challenges , 2008 .

[19]  Klea Katsouyanni,et al.  Collaborative research: Accomplishments & potential , 2008, Environmental health : a global access science source.

[20]  Andreas Oberweis,et al.  A Service-oriented Information System for Collaborative Research and Doctoral Education , 2006, 2006 IEEE International Conference on e-Business Engineering (ICEBE'06).

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

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

[23]  E. Frede,et al.  And so we plough along: the nature and nurture of partnerships for inquiry , 2001 .

[24]  Marcia G. Ory,et al.  Yours, Mine, and Ours: The Importance of Scientific Collaboration in Advancing the Field of Behavior Change Research , 2005, Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine.