Skip to main content
Log in

Does the higher citation of collaborative research differ from region to region? A case study of Economics

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many studies have found that collaborative research is, in general, more highly cited than non-collaborative research. This paper describes an investigation into the extent to which the association between high citation and collaboration for Economics articles published in 2000 varies from region to region and depends on the choice of indicator of citation level. Using data from the Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) for 18 countries, 17 American states and four indicators of citation level the citation levels of the collaborative articles are compared with the citation levels of the non-collaborative articles. The main findings are that: (a) for every country and every indicator the mean citation level of the collaborative articles was at least as high as that for the non-collaborative articles, but for five US states and for at least one other indicator the citation level of collaborative articles was lower than that of non-collaborative articles, and (b) the extent to which collaborative articles were more highly cited varied considerably from country to country, from state to state, and from indicator to indicator. This indicates the importance of using multiple indicators when investigating citation advantage since the choice of indicator can change the results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Avkiran, N. K. (1997). Scientific collaboration in finance does not lead to better quality research. Scientometrics, 39(2), 173–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bordons, M., Gomez, I., Fernandez, M. T., Zulueta, M. A., & Mendez, A. (1996). Local, domestic and international scientific collaboration in biomedical research. Scientometrics, 37(2), 279–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crase, D., & Rosato, F. D. (1992). Single versus multiple authorship in professional journals. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dancing, 63(7), 28–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frederiksen, L. F. (2004). Disciplinary determinants of bibliometric impact in Danish industrial research: Collaboration and visibility. Scientometrics, 61(2), 253–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W. (2000). Science in Scandinavia: A bibliometric approach. Scientometrics, 48(2), 121–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W. (2001). National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship. Scientometrics, 51(1), 69–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W. (2002). Co-authorship patterns and trends in the sciences (1980.1998). A bibliometric study with implications for database indexing and search strategies. Library Trends, 50(3), 461–473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2001). Double effort = double impact? a critical view at international co-authorship in chemistry. Scientometrics, 50(2), 199–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W., & Thijs, B. (2004). Does co-authorship inflate the share of self citations? Scientometrics, 61(3), 395–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W., Thijs, B., & Schlemmer, B. (2004). A bibliometric approach to the role of author self-citations in scientific communication. Scientometrics, 59(1), 63–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldfinch, S., Dale, T., & DeRouen, K. (2003). Science from the periphery: Collaboration, networks and ‘periphery effects’ in the citation of New Zealand crown research institutes articles, 1995–2000. Scientometrics, 57(3), 321–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gómez, I., Fernandez, M. T., & Sebastian, J. (1999). Analysis of the structure of international scientific cooperation networks through bibliometric indicators. Scientometrics, 44(3), 441–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, R. L. (2007). Collaboration and article quality in the literature of academic librarianship. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33(2), 190–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • HEFCE. (2009). Interim report of the REF bibliometrics pilot exercise (http://www.hefce.ac.uk/Pubs/rdreports/2009/rd13_09/rd13_09.doc. Accessed 1st Feb 2010.

  • Herbertz, H. (1995). Does it pay to cooperate––a bibliometric case-study in molecular-biology. Scientometrics, 33(1), 117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J. S., & Hicks, D. (1997). How much is a collaboration worth? A calibrated bibliometric model. Scientometrics, 40(3), 541–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kousha, K., & Thelwall, M. (2007). Google Scholar citations and Google Web/URL citations: A multi-discipline exploratory analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(7), 1055–1065.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leimu, R. (2005). Does scientific collaboration increase the impact of ecological articles? Bioscience, 55, 438–443.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leta, J., & Chaimovich, H. (2002). Recognition and international collaboration: The Brazilian case. Scientometrics, 53(3), 325–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levitt, J. M., & Thelwall, M. (2008). Is multidisciplinary research more highly cited? A macrolevel study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 59(12), 1973–1984.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levitt, J. M. & Thewall, M. (2007). Two new indicators derived from the h-index for comparing citation impact: Hirsch frequencies and the normalised hirsch index. Proceedings of the 11th conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Infometrics, pp. 874–875.

  • Levitt, J. M., & Thewall, M. (2009). Citation levels and collaboration within library and information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(3), 434–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewison, G. (2007). Counting citations: Fractionation of addresses and “world-scale”, a new scalar. Proceedings of the 11th conference of the international society for scientometrics and infometrics, pp. 880–881.

  • Moed, H. F. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris, M., Oppenheim, C., & Rowland, F. (2008). The citation advantage of open-access articles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(12), 1963–1972.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pereira, J. C. R., Fischer, A. L., & Escuder, M. M. L. (2000). Driving factors of high performance in Brazilian management sciences for the 1981–1995 period. Scientometrics, 49(2), 307–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Persson, O., Glänzel, W., & Danell, R. (2004). Inflationary bibliometric values: The role of scientific collaboration and the need for relative indicators in evaluative studies. Scientometrics, 60(3), 421–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schubert, A., & Braun, T. (1986). Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact. Scientometrics, 9, 281–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, F., & Fang, Y. C. (2007). Citation data analysis on hydrogeology. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(4), 518–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uthman, O. A. (2008). HIV/AIDS in Nigeria: A bibliometric analysis. BMC Infectious Diseases, 8(3). doi:10.1186/1471-2334-8-19.

  • Van Raan, A. F. J. (1998). The influence of international collaboration on the impact of research results. Some simple mathematical considerations concerning the role of self-citations. Scientometrics, 42(3), 423–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, E. E. (1997). Impact factor and international collaboration in Chilean physics: 1987–1994. Scientometrics, 38(2), 253–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yi, H., Ao, X. L., & Ho, Y. S. (2008). Use of citation per publication as an indicator to evaluate pentachlorophenol research. Scientometrics, 75(1), 67–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The research is supported by the Economic and Social Research Council (Grant number PTA-026-27-2228).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonathan M. Levitt.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Levitt, J.M., Thelwall, M. Does the higher citation of collaborative research differ from region to region? A case study of Economics. Scientometrics 85, 171–183 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0197-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0197-5

Keywords

Navigation