Abstract
This paper presents an empirical study of the relations between scientific output and collaboration performed on two scales: (1) an individual scale, for members of a study model, and (2) a group scale, for three samples varying in the level of productivity. The rank approach was applied in the preparation of the study model resulting in the selection of a set of the most prolific authors. In the course of that process, multiple authorship problem was solved by a dual approach, consisting of “normal count” and “modified straight count” procedures. As shown by the analysis of collaborative patterns, either on individual or on group scales, scientific output is highly dependent on the frequency of collaboration among the same authors. Expressed as “the collaboration measure”, it might serve as an indicator in comparative analyses of scientific productivity in a given field of science.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
M. J. MORAVCSIK,How to Grow Science, New York; Universe Books, 1980, p. 88.
T. SARAČEVIC, Perception of the needs for scientific and technical information in less developed countries,Journal of Documentation, 36 (3) (1980) 214.
N. PRAVDIĆ, V. OLUIĆ-VUKOVIĆ, T. TÓTH, Bibliometric analysis of contributions by scientists from Croatia (Yugoslavia) in the field of chemistry: Rank-frequency distribution,Kemija u industriji, 31 (7) (1982) 351.
N. PRAVDIĆ, V. OLUIĆ-VUKOVIĆ, T. TÓTH, Publishing habits of chemists from Croatia (Yugoslavia),Kemija u industriji, 32 (5) (1983) 213. (in Croatian).
I. MIHEL, V. OLUIĆ-VUKOVIĆ, N. PRAVDIĆ, The application of bibliometric laws in analysis of broad thematic fields: Papers from the Humanities,Informatologia Yugoslavica, 16 (1–2) (1984) 21.
V. OLUIĆ-VUKOVIĆ, T. TÓTH, N. PRAVDIĆ, Analysis of scientific productivity of chemists from Croatia (Yugoslavia),Kemija u industriji, 32 (5) (1983) 205. (in Croatian).
D. De SOLLA PRICE, D. deB BEAVER, Collaboration in an invisible college,American Psychologist, 21 (1966) 1011.
D. deB BEAVER, R. ROSEN, Studies in scientific collaboration. Part I. The professional origins of scientific co-authorship,Scientometrics, 1 (1) (1978) 65.
D. deB, BEAVER, R. ROSEN, Studies in scientific collaboration. Part II. Scientific co-authorship, research productivity and visibility in the French scientific elite, 1799–1830,Scientometrics, 1 (2) (1979) 133.
D. deB. BEAVER, R. ROSEN, Studies in scientific collaboration. Part III. Professionalization and the natural history of modern scientific co-authorship,Scientometrics, 1 (3) (1979) 231.
M. L. PAO, Co-authorship and productivity,Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science, 17 (1980) 279.
M. L. PAO, Co-authorship as communication measure,Library Research, 2 (1981) 327.
C. BALOG, Multiple authorship and author collaboration in agricultural research publications,Journal of Research Communication Studies, 2 (1979/1980) 159.
P. HODDER, Limits to collaborative authorhsip in science publishing,Journal of Research Communication Studies. 2 (1979/1980) 169.
G. De MAIO, H. W. KUSHNER, Quantification and multiple authorships in political science,Journal of Politics, 43 (1) (1981) 181.
J. JAROVSKY, Joint and individual authorship in informatics: A case study,Czeckoslovenska informatika, 23 (7–8) (1981) 201; c. f.Informatics Abstracts, 20 (1) (1982) 5.
W. GOFFMAN, K. S. WARREN,Scientific Information Systems and the Principle of Selectivity, New York, Praeger, 1980, p. 127.
S. M. LAWANI, Some bibliometric correlates of quality in scientific research,Scientometrics, 9 (1–2) (1986) 13.
A. M. DIAMOND, Jr. The money value of citations to single-authored and multiple-authored articles,Scientometrics, 8 (5–6) (1985) 315. and references cited therein.
K. SUBRAMANYAM, Bibliometric studies of research collaboration: A review,Journal of Information Science, 6 (1983) 33.
Bibliografija radova znanstvenih radnika SR Hravtske, 1971–1978, Zagreb, Republička zajednica za znanstveni rad SR Hrvatske, 1980.
D. De SOLLA PRICE,Little Science, Big Science, New York, Columbia Univ. Press, 1963.
D. LINDSEY, Production and citation measures in the sociology of science: The problem of multiple authorship,Social Studies of Science, 10 (1980) 145. and references cited therein.
J. S. LONG, R. McGINNIS, On adjusting productivity measures for multiple authorship,Scientometrics, 4 (5) (1982) 379.
D. LINDSEY, Further evidence for adjusting for multiple authorship,Scientometrics, 4 (5) (1982) 389.
J. S. LONG, R. McGINNIS, Further evidence for adjusting for multiple authorship,Scientometrics, 4 (5) (1982) 397.
J. R. COLE, S. COLE, The Ortega hypothesis,Science, 178 (1972) 368.
J. VLACHÝ, Evaluating the distribution of individual performance,Scientia Yugoslavica, 6 (1–4) (1980) 155.
P. D. ALLISON, Inequality and scienfitic productivity,Social Studies of Science, 10 (1980) 163.
R. K. MERTON, The Matthew effect in science,Science, 159 (1968) 56.
A. I. YABLONSKY, On fundamental regularities of the distribution of scientific productivity,Scientometrics, 2 (1) (1980) 3.
B. C. BROOKES, Foundations of information science. Part II. Quantitative aspects: Classes of things and the challenge of human individuality,Journal of Information Science, 2 (5) (1980) 209.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pravdić, N., Oluić-Vuković, V. Dual approach to multiple authorship in the study of collaboration/scientific output relationship. Scientometrics 10, 259–280 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016774
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016774