IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v11y2017i1p80-87.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The sum of it all: Revealing collaboration patterns by combining authorship and acknowledgements

Author

Listed:
  • Paul-Hus, Adèle
  • Mongeon, Philippe
  • Sainte-Marie, Maxime
  • Larivière, Vincent

Abstract

Acknowledgments are one of many conventions by which researchers publicly bestow recognition towards individuals, organizations and institutions that contributed in some way to the work that led to publication. Combining data on both co-authors and acknowledged individuals, the present study analyses disciplinary differences in researchers’ credit attribution practices in collaborative context. Our results show that the important differences traditionally observed between disciplines in terms of team size are greatly reduced when acknowledgees are taken into account. Broadening the measurement of collaboration beyond co-authorship by including individuals credited in the acknowledgements allows for an assessment of collaboration practices and team work that might be closer to the reality of contemporary research, especially in the social sciences and humanities.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul-Hus, Adèle & Mongeon, Philippe & Sainte-Marie, Maxime & Larivière, Vincent, 2017. "The sum of it all: Revealing collaboration patterns by combining authorship and acknowledgements," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 80-87.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:11:y:2017:i:1:p:80-87
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2016.11.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157716302723
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joi.2016.11.005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vincent Larivière & Yves Gingras & Éric Archambault, 2006. "Canadian collaboration networks: A comparative analysis of the natural sciences, social sciences and the humanities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 68(3), pages 519-533, September.
    2. Adèle Paul-Hus & Nadine Desrochers & Rodrigo Costas, 2016. "Characterization, description, and considerations for the use of funding acknowledgement data in Web of Science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(1), pages 167-182, July.
    3. Jonas Lundberg & Göran Tomson & Inger Lundkvist & John Sk?r & Mats Brommels, 2006. "Collaboration uncovered: Exploring the adequacy of measuring university-industry collaboration through co-authorship and funding," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 69(3), pages 575-589, December.
    4. Dorte Henriksen, 2016. "The rise in co-authorship in the social sciences (1980–2013)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(2), pages 455-476, May.
    5. Jeremy P. Birnholtz, 2006. "What does it mean to be an author? The intersection of credit, contribution, and collaboration in science," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 57(13), pages 1758-1770, November.
    6. Blaise Cronin & Gail McKenzie & Lourdes Rubio & Sherrill Weaver‐Wozniak, 1993. "Accounting for influence: Acknowledgments in contemporary sociology," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 44(7), pages 406-412, August.
    7. Blaise Cronin, 2004. "Bowling alone together: Academic writing as distributed cognition," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 55(6), pages 557-560, April.
    8. Branco Ponomariov & Craig Boardman, 2016. "What is co-authorship?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1939-1963, December.
    9. Grit Laudel, 2002. "What do we measure by co-authorships?," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 3-15, April.
    10. Katz, J. Sylvan & Martin, Ben R., 1997. "What is research collaboration?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Revet, Karine & Bodas-Freitas, Isabel Maria & Chollet, Barthélemy & D'Este, Pablo, 2023. "Exploring resource seeking in a scientific collaboration network and its effect on scientists' knowledge creation," INGENIO (CSIC-UPV) Working Paper Series 202311, INGENIO (CSIC-UPV), revised 15 May 2024.
    2. Weishu Liu & Li Tang & Guangyuan Hu, 2020. "Funding information in Web of Science: an updated overview," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(3), pages 1509-1524, March.
    3. Alberto Baccini & Eugenio Petrovich, 2022. "Normative versus strategic accounts of acknowledgment data: The case of the top-five journals of economics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 603-635, January.
    4. Katherine W. McCain, 2018. "Beyond Garfield’s Citation Index: an assessment of some issues in building a personal name Acknowledgments Index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 605-631, February.
    5. Li, Heyang & Wu, Meijun & Wang, Yougui & Zeng, An, 2022. "Bibliographic coupling networks reveal the advantage of diversification in scientific projects," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3).
    6. Wen Lou & Jiangen He & Lingxin Zhang & Zhijie Zhu & Yongjun Zhu, 2023. "Support behind the scenes: the relationship between acknowledgement, coauthor, and citation in Nobel articles," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(10), pages 5767-5790, October.
    7. Pengfei Jia & Weixi Xie & Guangyao Zhang & Xianwen Wang, 2023. "Do reviewers get their deserved acknowledgments from the authors of manuscripts?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(10), pages 5687-5703, October.
    8. Adèle Paul-Hus & Adrián A Díaz-Faes & Maxime Sainte-Marie & Nadine Desrochers & Rodrigo Costas & Vincent Larivière, 2017. "Beyond funding: Acknowledgement patterns in biomedical, natural and social sciences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-14, October.
    9. Shanwu Tian & Xiurui Xu & Ping Li, 2021. "Acknowledgement network and citation count: the moderating role of collaboration network," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7837-7857, September.
    10. Min Song & Keun Young Kang & Tatsawan Timakum & Xinyuan Zhang, 2020. "Examining influential factors for acknowledgements classification using supervised learning," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(2), pages 1-21, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sameer Kumar, 2018. "Ethical Concerns in the Rise of Co-Authorship and Its Role as a Proxy of Research Collaborations," Publications, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-9, August.
    2. Dorte Henriksen, 2016. "The rise in co-authorship in the social sciences (1980–2013)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(2), pages 455-476, May.
    3. Gómez-Ferri, Javier & González-Alcaide, Gregorio & LLopis-Goig, Ramón, 2019. "Measuring dissatisfaction with coauthorship: An empirical approach based on the researchers’ perception," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(4).
    4. Cristina Arhiliuc & Raf Guns, 2023. "Disciplinary collaboration rates in the social sciences and humanities: what is the influence of classification type?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3419-3436, June.
    5. Claudia N. González Brambila & José Luis Olivares-Vázquez, 2021. "Patterns and evolution of publication and co-authorship in Social Sciences in Mexico," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(3), pages 2595-2626, March.
    6. Anna Małgorzata Kamińska & Łukasz Opaliński & Łukasz Wyciślik, 2022. "The Landscapes of Sustainability in the Library and Information Science: Collaboration Insights," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-23, December.
    7. Adèle Paul-Hus & Adrián A Díaz-Faes & Maxime Sainte-Marie & Nadine Desrochers & Rodrigo Costas & Vincent Larivière, 2017. "Beyond funding: Acknowledgement patterns in biomedical, natural and social sciences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-14, October.
    8. Nadine Desrochers & Adèle Paul‐Hus & Jen Pecoskie, 2017. "Five decades of gratitude: A meta‐synthesis of acknowledgments research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(12), pages 2821-2833, December.
    9. Seongkyoon Jeong & Jae Young Choi, 2012. "The taxonomy of research collaboration in science and technology: evidence from mechanical research through probabilistic clustering analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 719-735, June.
    10. Jo Royle & Louisa Coles & Dorothy Williams & Paul Evans, 2007. "Publishing in international journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 71(1), pages 59-86, April.
    11. Haeussler, Carolin & Sauermann, Henry, 2013. "Credit where credit is due? The impact of project contributions and social factors on authorship and inventorship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 688-703.
    12. Seongkyoon Jeong & Jae Young Choi & Jaeyun Kim, 2011. "The determinants of research collaboration modes: exploring the effects of research and researcher characteristics on co-authorship," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(3), pages 967-983, December.
    13. Chao Lu & Yingyi Zhang & Yong‐Yeol Ahn & Ying Ding & Chenwei Zhang & Dandan Ma, 2020. "Co‐contributorship network and division of labor in individual scientific collaborations," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 71(10), pages 1162-1178, October.
    14. Liliana Arroyo Moliner & Eva Gallardo-Gallardo & Pedro Gallo de Puelles, 2017. "Understanding scientific communities: a social network approach to collaborations in Talent Management research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(3), pages 1439-1462, December.
    15. Alberto Baccini & Eugenio Petrovich, 2022. "Normative versus strategic accounts of acknowledgment data: The case of the top-five journals of economics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 603-635, January.
    16. S. Hennemann & T. Wang & I. Liefner, 2011. "Measuring regional science networks in China: a comparison of international and domestic bibliographic data sources," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(2), pages 535-554, August.
    17. Qingzhou Luo & Jianhong Cecilia Xia & Gaby Haddow & Michele Willson & Jun Yang, 2018. "Does distance hinder the collaboration between Australian universities in the humanities, arts and social sciences?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 695-715, May.
    18. Dorte Henriksen, 2018. "What factors are associated with increasing co-authorship in the social sciences? A case study of Danish Economics and Political Science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 1395-1421, March.
    19. Thelwall, Mike & Sud, Pardeep, 2016. "National, disciplinary and temporal variations in the extent to which articles with more authors have more impact: Evidence from a geometric field normalised citation indicator," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 48-61.
    20. Ch Peidu, 2019. "Can authors’ position in the ascription be a measure of dominance?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(3), pages 1527-1547, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:11:y:2017:i:1:p:80-87. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joi .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.