IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/trosos/v16y2022i2d10.1007_s12626-022-00111-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Uncovering the Strategies and Dynamics of Research Fields Using Network Science: Structural Evidence from a Decade of Privacy Research

Author

Listed:
  • Charles Perez

    (PSB: Paris School of Business)

  • Karina Sokolova

    (PSB: Paris School of Business)

  • Vincent Dutot

    (Strategy and Management, IPAG Business School)

Abstract

Objective This study aims to better understand the dynamics, organisation and collaboration strategies of a research community through social network analysis. While network is particularly adapted to handling the complexity of social interactions between groups, it is currently underused in many research fields. The topology of the social graph and collaboration strategies is rarely investigated or discussed despite its potential usefulness in understanding group dynamics. The author-strategic diagram, based on social network analysis metrics, is proposed and discussed. Methods Our analysis considers 10 years of co-authored research publications on privacy. First, we explore the dynamics of the community by analysing the incoming, remaining and departing authors, and the authors’ publishing lifetimes. Second, we focus on the dynamics using social network analysis metrics: distance, modularity, node centralities, local clustering coefficient, assortativity. Results Despite the multi-disciplinary nature of privacy research, collaborations exhibit cohesion and a small-world nature. However, the research community is hierarchical, the domain being structured around a few leaders and sub-leaders performing bridging roles between sub-communities. Authors collaborate with others in a similar position in the network except for the leaders, who collaborate a lot, but not with each other. Our author-strategic diagram shows the coexistence of divergent collaboration strategies within a single community related to multiple visions of social capital. Transition phases seem to be present; these could indicate future leaders of the community. Conclusion Our results highlight the disparity within the research community and the differing connection types that leaders and other researchers have. Our results show the usefulness of network science in understanding a research field’s community and its dynamics. Comparable analyses of other research communities could help to uncover similar patterns and to tie micro and macro theories together as we show for the theory of social capital.

Suggested Citation

  • Charles Perez & Karina Sokolova & Vincent Dutot, 2022. "Uncovering the Strategies and Dynamics of Research Fields Using Network Science: Structural Evidence from a Decade of Privacy Research," The Review of Socionetwork Strategies, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 573-597, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:trosos:v:16:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s12626-022-00111-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s12626-022-00111-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12626-022-00111-1
    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/s12626-022-00111-1?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. Grant Lewison & Valentina Markusova, 2011. "Female researchers in Russia: have they become more visible?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 139-152, October.
    2. de Moya-Anegon, Felix & Guerrero-Bote, Vicente P. & Lopez-Illescas, Carmen & Moed, Henk F., 2018. "Statistical relationships between corresponding authorship, international co-authorship and citation impact of national research systems," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1251-1262.
    3. Inoue, Masaaki & Pham, Thong & Shimodaira, Hidetoshi, 2020. "Joint estimation of non-parametric transitivity and preferential attachment functions in scientific co-authorship networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3).
    4. Gohar Feroz Khan, 2013. "Social media-based systems: an emerging area of information systems research and practice," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(1), pages 159-180, April.
    5. Andrea Landherr & Bettina Friedl & Julia Heidemann, 2010. "A Critical Review of Centrality Measures in Social Networks," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 2(6), pages 371-385, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kong, Ling & Wang, Dongbo, 2020. "Comparison of citations and attention of cover and non-cover papers," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4).
    2. Igor Kissin & Edwin L. Bradley, 2013. "A surname-based patent-related indicator: the contribution of Jewish inventors to US patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(2), pages 357-368, November.
    3. Fink, Kilian & Krüger, Ulrich & Meller, Barbara & Wong, Lui-Hsian, 2016. "The credit quality channel: Modeling contagion in the interbank market," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 83-97.
    4. Jun Gao & Xiang Yu, 2022. "Factors Affecting the Evolution of Technical Cooperation among “Belt and Road Initiative” Countries Based on TERGMs and ERGMs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-16, February.
    5. Almiala, Into & Aalto, Henrik & Kuikka, Vesa, 2023. "Influence spreading model for partial breakthrough effects on complex networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 630(C).
    6. Samitas, Aristeidis & Kampouris, Elias, 2018. "Empirical investigation of co-authorship in the field of finance: A network perspective," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 235-246.
    7. Ruonan Cai & Wencan Tian & Rundong Luo & Zhigang Hu, 2024. "The generation mechanism of research leadership in international collaboration based on GERGM: a case from the field of artificial intelligence," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(10), pages 5821-5839, October.
    8. Eun Soo Park & An Yong Lee, 2020. "Techno-Cultural Factors Affecting Policy Decision-Making: A Social Network Analysis of South Korea’s Local Spatial Planning Policy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-24, November.
    9. Shuai Lin & Limin Jia & Hengrun Zhang & Yanhui Wang, 2021. "A method for assessing resilience of high-speed EMUs considering a network-based system topology and performance data," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 235(5), pages 877-895, October.
    10. Fritze, Martin P. & Urmetzer, Florian & Khan, Gohar F. & Sarstedt, Marko & Neely, Andy & Schäfers, Tobias, 2018. "From Goods to Services Consumption: A Social Network Analysis on Sharing Economy and Servitization Research," SMR - Journal of Service Management Research, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 2(3), pages 3-16.
    11. Frédéric Durand & Jen Nelles, 2014. "Dossier: Institutions and skilled mobility. Guest Editors: Gery Nijenhuis & Maggi W.H. Leung," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 105(5), pages 573-590, December.
    12. Di, Jinghan & Wen, Zongguo & Jiang, Meihui & Miatto, Alessio, 2022. "Patterns and features of embodied environmental flow networks in the international trade of metal resources: A study of aluminum," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    13. Wang Yu & Guo Jinli & Liu Han, 2017. "A New Evaluation Method of Node Importance in Directed Weighted Complex Networks," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 5(4), pages 367-375, August.
    14. László Csató, 2017. "Measuring centrality by a generalization of degree," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 25(4), pages 771-790, December.
    15. Mason Youngblood & David Lahti, 2018. "A bibliometric analysis of the interdisciplinary field of cultural evolution," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-9, December.
    16. Sandro Tarkhan-Mouravi, 2020. "Traditional indicators inflate some countries’ scientific impact over 10 times," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(1), pages 337-356, April.
    17. Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez & Cassidy R Sugimoto & Vincent Larivière, 2019. "Follow the leader: On the relationship between leadership and scholarly impact in international collaborations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-18, June.
    18. López, Susana & Molina, Elisenda & Saboyá, Martha & Tejada, Juan, 2024. "Node centrality based on its edges importance: The Position centrality," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 90-104.
    19. Chris Fields, 2015. "How small is the center of science? Short cross-disciplinary cycles in co-authorship graphs," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1287-1306, February.
    20. Dominik Saul & Robyn Laura Kosinsky & Elizabeth J. Atkinson & Madison L. Doolittle & Xu Zhang & Nathan K. LeBrasseur & Robert J. Pignolo & Paul D. Robbins & Laura J. Niedernhofer & Yuji Ikeno & Diana , 2022. "A new gene set identifies senescent cells and predicts senescence-associated pathways across tissues," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, 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:spr:trosos:v:16:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s12626-022-00111-1. 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.