IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v103y2015i3d10.1007_s11192-015-1572-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cohesive subgroups in academic networks: unveiling clique integration of top-level female and male researchers

Author

Listed:
  • Nadine V. Kegen

    (Universität Hamburg)

Abstract

Social networks are said to have a positive impact on scientific development. Conventionally, it is argued that female and male researchers differ in access to and participation in networks and hence experience unequal career opportunities. Due to limited capacities of time and resources as well as homophily, top-level scientists may structure their contacts to reduce problems of complexity and uncertainty. The outcomes of the structuring can be cohesive subgroups within networks of relation. Women in science might suffer exclusion from cliques because of being dissimilar in the arena. The present paper aims to explore integration in and composition of scientific cliques. A three-step analysis is conducted: Firstly, cliques are identified. Secondly, overlap structures are examined. Thirdly, group compositions are analysed in terms of other personal attributes of the researchers involved. Building on network data of female and male investigators, the article applies a comparative case study design including two cutting edge research institutions from the German Excellence Initiative. The study contrasts a Cluster of Excellence with a Graduate School and the corresponding formal with the informal networks. The results imply that the general hypothesis of unfavourably embedded female researchers cannot be supported. Although women are less integrated in scientific cliques, the majority is involved in an inner social circle which enables access to career-relevant network resources.

Suggested Citation

  • Nadine V. Kegen, 2015. "Cohesive subgroups in academic networks: unveiling clique integration of top-level female and male researchers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(3), pages 897-922, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:103:y:2015:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-015-1572-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-015-1572-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-015-1572-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-015-1572-z?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. Higley, John & Moore, Gwen, 1981. "Elite Integration in the United States and Australia," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 75(3), pages 581-597, September.
    2. Han-Wen Chang & Mu-Hsuan Huang, 2014. "Cohesive subgroups in the international collaboration network in astronomy and astrophysics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(3), pages 1587-1607, December.
    3. Dorothea Jansen & Regina Görtz & Richard Heidler, 2010. "Knowledge production and the structure of collaboration networks in two scientific fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(1), pages 219-241, April.
    4. Geert Duysters & John Hagedoorn & Charmianne Lemmens, 2003. "The effect of alliance block membership on innovative performance," Revue d'Économie Industrielle, Programme National Persée, vol. 103(1), pages 59-70.
    5. Mary K. Feeney & Margarita Bernal, 2010. "Women in STEM networks: who seeks advice and support from women scientists?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(3), pages 767-790, December.
    6. Martin Gargiulo & Mario Benassi, 2000. "Trapped in Your Own Net? Network Cohesion, Structural Holes, and the Adaptation of Social Capital," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(2), pages 183-196, April.
    7. Duysters, G.M. & Lemmens, C.E.A.V., 2002. "Cohesive subgroup formation: Enabling and constraining effects of social capital in strategic technology alliance networks," Working Papers 02.07, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
    8. Elba Mauleón & María Bordons, 2010. "Male and female involvement in patenting activity in Spain," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(3), pages 605-621, June.
    9. Richard D. Alba & Gwen Moore, 1978. "Elite Social Circles," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 7(2), pages 167-188, November.
    10. Katz, J. Sylvan & Martin, Ben R., 1997. "What is research collaboration?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, March.
    11. Bozeman, Barry & Corley, Elizabeth, 2004. "Scientists' collaboration strategies: implications for scientific and technical human capital," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 599-616, May.
    12. Borocz, Jozsef & Southworth, Caleb, 1998. ""Who you know" earnings effects of formal and informal social network resources under late state socialism in Hungary, 1986-1987," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 401-425.
    13. R. Luce & Albert Perry, 1949. "A method of matrix analysis of group structure," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 14(2), pages 95-116, June.
    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. Lutz Bornmann, 2016. "Is the promotion of research reflected in bibliometric data? A network analysis of highly cited papers on the Clusters of Excellence supported under the Excellence Initiative in Germany," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(3), pages 1041-1061, June.

    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. Eric W. Welch & Yamini Jha, 2016. "Network and perceptual determinants of satisfaction among science and engineering faculty in US research universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 290-328, April.
    2. Itay Mayrose & Shiri Freilich, 2015. "The Interplay between Scientific Overlap and Cooperation and the Resulting Gain in Co-Authorship Interactions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-10, September.
    3. Duk Hee Lee & Il Won Seo & Ho Chull Choe & Hee Dae Kim, 2012. "Collaboration network patterns and research performance: the case of Korean public research institutions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 925-942, June.
    4. Belén Álvarez-Bornstein & Adrián A. Díaz-Faes & María Bordons, 2019. "What characterises funded biomedical research? Evidence from a basic and a clinical domain," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 805-825, May.
    5. Jan Resenga Maluleka & Omwoyo Bosire Onyancha & Isola Ajiferuke, 2016. "Factors influencing research collaboration in LIS schools in South Africa," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(2), pages 337-355, May.
    6. Andrej Kastrin & Jelena Klisara & Borut Lužar & Janez Povh, 2017. "Analysis of Slovenian research community through bibliographic networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 791-813, February.
    7. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo & Flavia Costa, 2012. "Identifying interdisciplinarity through the disciplinary classification of coauthors of scientific publications," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(11), pages 2206-2222, November.
    8. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Hessels, Laurens K., 2011. "Factors associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 463-472, April.
    9. Corsini, Alberto & Pezzoni, Michele & Visentin, Fabiana, 2022. "What makes a productive Ph.D. student?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    10. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, 2022. "Drivers of academic engagement in public–private research collaboration: an empirical study," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(6), pages 1861-1884, December.
    11. Edler, Jakob & Fier, Heide & Grimpe, Christoph, 2011. "International scientist mobility and the locus of knowledge and technology transfer," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 791-805, July.
    12. Elizabeth S. Vieira & Jorge Cerdeira, 2022. "The integration of African countries in international research networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 1995-2021, April.
    13. Diego Ubfal & Alessandro Maffioli, 2010. "The Impact of Funding on Research Collaboration: Evidence from Argentina," SPD Working Papers 1006, Inter-American Development Bank, Office of Strategic Planning and Development Effectiveness (SPD).
    14. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Hessels, Laurens K. & Vandeberg, Rens L.J., 2008. "A resource-based view on the interactions of university researchers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1255-1266, September.
    15. Giuliani, Elisa & Pietrobelli, Carlo, 2014. "Social Network Analysis Methodologies for the Evaluation of Cluster Development Programs," Papers in Innovation Studies 2014/11, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    16. Ana Fernández & Esther Ferrándiz & M. Dolores León, 2021. "Are organizational and economic proximity driving factors of scientific collaboration? Evidence from Spanish universities, 2001–2010," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 579-602, January.
    17. 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).
    18. Jung, Jiwon & Bozeman, Barry & Gaughan, Monica, 2017. "Impact of research collaboration cosmopolitanism on job satisfaction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1863-1872.
    19. Ho Fai Chan & Ali Sina Önder & Benno Torgler, 2015. "Do Nobel laureates change their patterns of collaboration following prize reception?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 2215-2235, December.
    20. Li, Feng & Miao, Yajun & Yang, Chenchen, 2015. "How do alumni faculty behave in research collaboration? An analysis of Chang Jiang Scholars in China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 438-450.

    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:spr:scient:v:103:y:2015:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-015-1572-z. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.