바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.33 No.4
Citation Share

Comparative Analysis on the Relationships between the Centralities in Co-authorship Networks and Research Performance Considering the Number of Co-authors

Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management / Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, (P)1013-0799; (E)2586-2073
2016, v.33 no.4, pp.175-199
https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2016.33.4.175

(2016). Comparative Analysis on the Relationships between the Centralities in Co-authorship Networks and Research Performance Considering the Number of Co-authors. Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, 33(4), 175-199, https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2016.33.4.175
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

We analyzed the relationships between the co-authorship network centralities and the research performance indicators with the authors and the number of citations of the papers published for 10 years in Korean library and information science journals. In particular, the research performance indicators were calculated with normal counting and with fractional counting also. As a result of correlation analysis between the variables by setting the different ranges of the author groups to be analyzed according to the number of articles, it was possible to explain the inconsistent results of the previous studies on the correlations between the researchers' citation indicators and their co-authorship network centralities. Overall, the degree of co-authorship activities measured by collaboration coefficient showed no or negatively correlated with research performance. There were statistically significant positive correlations between the centralities and the research performance indicators, but the correlation was not significant in the analysis of the top 30 authors by number of articles.

keywords
공저 네트워크, 연구성과, 네트워크 중심성, 공저자, 공동연구, co-authorship network, research performance, network centrality, co-authors, research collaborations

Reference

1.

김은주. (2015). 정신의학 분야 국제공동연구의 지식구조 네트워크에 관한 연구. 정보관리학회지, 32(3), 317-340. http://dx.doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2015.32.3.317.

2.

박치성. (2012). 행정학 학문공동체의 공동연구 네트워크 구조에 관한 연구:1998-2009년간 24개 행정학 학술지의 논문공저자 네트워크의 분석을 중심으로. 한국사회와 행정연구, 22(4), 129-153.

3.

이수상. (2013). 연구자 네트워크의 중심성과 연구성과의 연관성 분석 : 국내 기록관리학 분야 학술논문을 중심으로. 한국도서관·정보학회지, 44(3), 405-428.

4.

이재윤. (2006). 계량서지적 네트워크 분석을 위한 중심성 척도에 관한 연구. 한국문헌정보학회지, 40(3), 191-214.

5.

이재윤. (2006). 연구성과 측정을 위한 h-지수의 개량에 관한 연구. 정보관리학회지, 23(3), 167-186.

6.

이재윤. (2014). 공동연구 네트워크 분석을 위한 중심성 지수에 대한 비교 연구. 정보관리학회지, 31(3), 153-179. http://dx.doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2014.31.3.153.

7.

이재윤. (2015). 가중 네트워크를 위한 일반화된 지역중심성 지수. 정보관리학회지, 32(2), 7-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2015.32.2.007.

8.

이재윤. (2016). 공저자 수를 고려한 h-지수 산출. 정보관리학회지, 33(3), 7-29. http://dx.doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2016.33.3.007.

9.

임병학. (2012). 논문 공동저자 네트워크가 연구 성과에 미치는 영향에 대한 연구: 로고스경영연구의 공동저자를 중심으로. 로고스경영연구, 10(1), 1-20.

10.

Abbasi, A.. (2011). Identifying the effects of co-authorship networks on the performance of scholars: A correlation and regression analysis of performance measures and social network analysis measures. Journal of Informetrics, 5(4), 594-607. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2011.05.007.

11.

Ajiferuke, I.. (1988). Collaborative coefficient: A single measure of the degree of collaboration in research. Scientometrics, 14(5), 421-433. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02017100.

12.

Bordons, M.. (2015). The relationship between the research performance of scientists and their position in co-authorship networks in three fields. Journal of Informetrics, 9(1), 135-144. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2014.12.001.

13.

Egghe, L.. (2006). Theory and practise of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69, 131-152. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0144-7.

14.

Franceschet, M.. (2010). The effect of scholar collaboration on impact and quality of academic papers. Journal of Informetrics, 4(4), 540-553.

15.

Gazni, A.. (2011). Investigating different types of research collaboration and citation impact: A case study of Harvard University’s publications. Scientometrics, 87(2), 251-265. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0343-8.

16.

Hirsch, J. E.. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569-16572. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102.

17.

Katz, J. S.. (1997). What is research collaboration?. Research Policy, 26(1), 1-18.

18.

Larivière, V.. (2015). Team size matters: Collaboration and scientific impact since 1900. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(7), 1323-1332. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.23266.

19.

이재윤. (2014). A Comparative Analysis on Multiple Authorship Counting for Author Co-citation Analysis. 정보관리학회지, 31(2), 57-77. http://dx.doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2014.31.2.057.

20.

Lee, S.. (2005). The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 673-702. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0306312705052359.

21.

Li, E. Y.. (2013). Co-authorship networks and research impact: A social capital perspective. Research Policy, 42(9), 1515-1530. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.06.012.

Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management

e-Submission OA Policy