A Survey of the Collaboration Rate of Authors in the E-Learning Subject Area over a 10-Year Period (2005-2014) Using Web of Science

Partnership is one of the mechanisms of scientific development, and scientific collaboration or co-authorship is considered a key element in the progress of science. This study is a survey with a scientometric approach focusing on the field of e-learning products over 10 years. In an Advanced Search of the Web of Science, the following search formula was used: TS=("m-learning" OR "mlearning" OR "mobile learning" OR "online learning" OR "virtual learning" OR "distance learning" OR "electronic learning"). The study was limited to 2005-2014, and the document type was limited to paper. A total of 4292 documents were found, to which 12362 authors contributed. The articles were evaluated individually   and their information was entered into Microsoft Office Excel 2007 for analysis using the collaborative coefficient formula. In the Computers and Education journal, articles with two authors are the most frequent. The United States, with the highest production of articles in the field of e-learning, tends to produce articles with two authors. In 2014, the most productive year, articles with three authors were more frequent. The highest collaborative coefficient is in 2005 and 2014. Our findings show that despite the need for research activities as a team, the authors in the field of e-learning tend to publish their papers alone or in a team of two.

[1]  Maria Prosperina Vitale,et al.  The use of different data sources in the analysis of co-authorship networks and scientific performance , 2013, Soc. Networks.

[2]  Jean Tague-Sutcliffe,et al.  Collaborative coefficient: A single measure of the degree of collaboration in research , 1988, Scientometrics.

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

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

[5]  Juha Kettunen,et al.  Co-Authorship Networks of Scientific Collaboration , 2016 .

[6]  Morteza Hemmat,et al.  A scientometric study of media literacy literature based on Scopus record through 2011 , 2013 .

[7]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  International collaboration in science and the formation of a core group , 2008, J. Informetrics.

[8]  Thomas Krichel,et al.  A social network analysis of research collaboration in theeconomics community , 2006 .

[9]  K. C. Garg,et al.  A study of collaboration in laser science and technology , 2001, Scientometrics.

[10]  Julia Osca Lluch,et al.  Co-authorship and citation networks in Spanish history of science research , 2009, Scientometrics.

[11]  Richard L. Hart,et al.  Co-authorship in the academic library literature: A survey of attitudes and behaviors , 2000 .

[12]  Francisco J. Acedo,et al.  Co-Authorship in Management and Organizational Studies: An Empirical and Network Analysis , 2006 .

[13]  A. Albarrak,et al.  E-learning in Medical Education and Blended Learning Approach , 2011 .

[14]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  Double effort = Double impact? A critical view at international co-authorship in chemistry , 2004, Scientometrics.

[15]  M. López-Ferrer Co-authorship and citation networks in Spanish history of science research , 2009 .

[16]  Ana Andrés,et al.  Measuring Academic Research: How to Undertake a Bibliometric Study , 2009 .

[17]  F. Bry,et al.  Education in a technological world : communicating current and emerging research and technological efforts , 2011 .

[18]  Blaise Cronin,et al.  : Public Intellectuals: A Study of Decline , 2003 .

[19]  Félix de Moya Anegón,et al.  Comparative analysis of university-government-enterprise co-authorship networks in three scientific domains in the region of Madrid , 2008, Inf. Res..

[20]  D. Sonnenwald Scientific collaboration , 2007, Annual Review of Information Science and Technology.