The relationship between acquaintanceship and coauthorship in scientific collaboration networks

This article examines the relationship between acquaintanceship and coauthorship patterns in a multi-disciplinary, multi-institutional, geographically distributed research center. Two social networks are constructed and compared: a network of coauthorship, representing how researchers write articles with one another, and a network of acquaintanceship, representing how those researchers know each other on a personal level, based on their responses to an online survey. Statistical analyses of the topology and community structure of these networks point to the importance of small-scale, local, personal networks predicated upon acquaintanceship for accomplishing collaborative work in scientific communities. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

[1]  Bonnie A. Nardi,et al.  NetWORKers and their Activity in Intensional Networks , 2002, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[2]  M E J Newman.  Assortative mixing in networks. , 2002, Physical review letters.

[3]  Marco Tomassini,et al.  The structure of the genetic programming collaboration network , 2007, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[4]  Jerrold W. Grossman,et al.  Famous trails to Paul Erdős , 1999 .

[5]  W. Wulf,et al.  Collaborative Research across Disciplinary and Organizational Boundaries , 2008 .

[6]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks , 1998, Nature.

[7]  Dan Cosley,et al.  Inferring social ties from geographic coincidences , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[8]  Sofía Liberman,et al.  The flow of knowledge: Scientific contacts in formal meetings , 1997 .

[9]  M E J Newman,et al.  Community structure in social and biological networks , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[10]  E KrautRobert,et al.  Relationships and Tasks in Scientific Research Collaboration , 1987 .

[11]  Marko A. Rodriguez,et al.  Collaboration in sensor network research: an in-depth longitudinal analysis of assortative mixing patterns , 2009, Scientometrics.

[12]  Weimao Ke,et al.  Studying the emerging global brain: Analyzing and visualizing the impact of co-authorship teams , 2005, Complex..

[13]  M. Newman.  1 Who is the best connected scientist ? A study of scientific coauthorship networks , 2004 .

[14]  W. G. Cochran.  Some Methods for Strengthening the Common χ 2 Tests , 1954 .

[15]  Judith S. Olson,et al.  Distance Matters , 2000, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[16]  J. Reichardt,et al.  Statistical mechanics of community detection. , 2006, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[17]  Jerrold W. Grossman,et al.  A portion of the well-known collaboration graph , 1995 .

[18]  M. Newman,et al.  Scientific collaboration networks. II. Shortest paths, weighted networks, and centrality. , 2001, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[19]  Leah A. Lievrouw,et al.  Triangulation as a research strategy for identifying invisible colleges among biomedical scientists , 1987 .

[20]  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..

[21]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations , 2001, cond-mat/0104162.

[22]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Relationships and tasks in scientific research collaborations , 1986, CSCW '86.

[23]  Justin Solomon,et al.  Programmers, Professors, and Parasites: Credit and Co-Authorship in Computer Science , 2009, Sci. Eng. Ethics.

[24]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  Publication and cooperation patterns of the authors of neuroscience journals , 2004, Scientometrics.

[25]  Thomas A. Finholt,et al.  Collaboratories , 2002, Annu. Rev. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[26]  Weimao Ke,et al.  Studying the emerging global brain: Analyzing and visualizing the impact of co-authorship teams: Research Articles , 2005 .

[27]  M. Reiser,et al.  3. A Goodness-of-Fit Test for the Latent Class Model When Expected Frequencies are Small , 1999 .

[28]  Joachim Schummer,et al.  Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology , 2004, Scientometrics.

[29]  Downloaded from , 1997 .

[30]  Roderick J. A. Little,et al.  The Analysis of Social Science Data with Missing Values , 1989 .

[31]  Judith S. Olson,et al.  From Shared Databases to Communities of Practice: A Taxonomy of Collaboratories , 2007, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[32]  Petter Holme,et al.  Structure and time evolution of an Internet dating community , 2002, Soc. Networks.

[33]  David Krackhardt,et al.  PREDICTING WITH NETWORKS: NONPARAMETRIC MULTIPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF DYADIC DATA * , 1988 .

[34]  James D. Myers,et al.  Social networks in the virtual science laboratory , 2002, CACM.

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

[36]  Brandon Van Der Heide,et al.  Too Much of a Good Thing? The Relationship Between Number of Friends and Interpersonal Impressions on Facebook , 2008, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..