Abstract
Evidence is examined for the repeated claim that published papers with more than one author are, on average, of higher quality than those with a single author. Among published studies it is shown that no clear conclusion can be drawn, though evidence supporting the claim is stronger in astronomy and physics than among the social sciences. An empirical study of 656 papers in four Australian science journals produced negative results. Possible reasons for the differing results, and difficulties in researching the field, are highlighted.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
D. De. S. Price,Little Science, Big Science, Columbia University Press, New York, 1963, p. 88.
E. g. K.D. White, L. Dalgleish, G. Arnold, Authorship patterns in psychology: national and international trends,Bulletin of Psychonomic Society, 20 (1982), No. 4, 190–192.
J. Ziman,The Force of Knowledge, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK, 1976, p. 237.
M. Charlesworth, L. Farrall, T. Stokes, D. Turnbull,Life among the Scientists, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 1989, p. 87.
A.E. Bayer, A bibliometric analysis of marriage and family literature,Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44 (1982), August, 527–538. p. 531.
D. deB. Bayer, Collaboration and teamwork in physics,Czechoslovak Journal of Physics B, 36 (1986) 14–18 (p. 14).
S. Kyvik, Productivity difference, fields of learning, Lotka's law,Scientometrics, 15 (1989) 205–214 (p. 207).
S.M. Lawani, Some bibliometric correlates of quality in scientific research,Scientometrics, 9 (1986) 13–25
Bayer,op. cit., p. 531.
Beaver,op. cit. p. 14.
ibid. Beaver,.
ibid..
Kyvik,op. cit. pp. 206–7.
Lawani,op. cit., p. 24.
B.C. Griffith, Exact fits in bibliometrics: some tools and results, In:L. Egghe, R. Rousseau (Eds),Informetrics 87/88, Holland, Elsevier Science Publishers BV, 1988, 85–95.
M.D. Gordon, A critical reassessment of inferred relations between multiple authorship, scientific collaboration, the production of papers and their acceptance for publication,Scientometrics, 2 (1980) 193–201.
S. Presser, Collaboration and the quality of research,Social Studies of Science, 10 (1980) 95–101.
H. Zuckerman, R.K. Merton, Patterns of evaluation in science: Institutionalization, structure and functions of the referee systems,Minerva, 9 (1971) 66–100.
A.E. Nudelman, C.E. Landers, The failure of 100 divided by 3 to equal 33-1/3,The American Sociologist, 7 (1972), November, 9.
M. Douglas (Ed.),Essays in the Sociology of Perception, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1982.
D. deB Beaver, R. Rosen, Studies in scientific collaboration, Part II. Scientific co-authorship, research productivity an visibility in the French scientific elite 1799–1830,Scientometrics, 1 (1979) 133–149.
Lawani,op. cit..
Bayer,op. cit.. p. 529.
J.C. Smart, A.E. Bayer, Author collaboration and impact: a note on citation rates of single and multiple authored articles,Scientometrics, 10 (1986) 297–305.
M. Oromaner, Collaboration and impact: The career of multi-authored publications,Social Science Information, 14 (1974) 147–155.
D. Lindsey, Production and citation measures in the sociology of science: The problem of multiple authorship,Social Studies of Science, 10 (1980), 145–62 (p. 162).
J. Vlachy, Publication trends in the Czechoslovak Journal of Physics,Czechoslovak Journal of Physics B, 33 (1983) 473–476.
J. Vlachy,Proceeding of the International Conference on Postgraduate Education of Physicists Prague 24th–30th August 1980, In: P.J. Kennedy, K. Vacek (Eds), International Commission on Physics Education, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, 1980, pp. 169–180.
J. Vlachy, Trends in Czechoslovak physics research — manpower, publication output, citation response,Czechoslovak Journal of Physics B, 32 (1982) 1407–1414.
J. Vlachy,op. cit. note 29, p. 175, Fig. 9.
H. Abt, Citations to single and multiauthored papers,Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 96 (1984) September, 746–749.
E. Bujdoso, W.S. Lyon, I. Noszlopi Prompt nuclear analysis — growth and trends. A scientometric study,Journal of Radioanalytical Chemistry, 74 (1982) 197–238.
D.E. Chubin, K.E. Studer, Knowledge and structures of scientific growth. Measurement of a cancer problem domain,Scientometrics, 1 (1979) 171–193.
Chubin, Studer,op. cit. p. 176.
A.R. Rao, M.N. Vahia, Multiple citations of multiple-author publications,Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 98 (1986) May 511–512.
H. Small, B.C. Griffith, The structure of scientific literatures 1. Identifying and graphing specialties,Science Studies, 4 (1974) 17–40.
D. Crane,Invisible Colleges, University of Chicago Press, 1976.
M.J. Mulkay,The Social Process of Innovation, Macmillan, London, 1972.
T.D. Stokes, J.A. Hartley, Coauthorship, social structure and influence within specialties,Social Studies of Science, 19 (1989) 101–125.
D. de S. Price, The science/technology relationship, the craft of experimental science and policy for the improvement of high technology innovations,Research Policy, 13 (1984) 3–20.
E.g. R. Over, Collaborative research and publication in psychology.,American Psychologist, 37 (1982) 996–1001.
H. Caton, Product control in the Truth Industry,Search, 20 (1989) 24–26 (p. 24).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bridgstock, M. The quality of single and multiple authored papers; An unresolved problem. Scientometrics 21, 37–48 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02019181
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02019181