Advertisement

Analyzing the network structure and gender differences among the members of the Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) community

  • Fariba Karimi
  • Philipp Mayr
  • Fakhri Momeni
Article

Abstract

In this paper, we analyze a major part of the research output of the Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) community in the period 2000–2016 from a network analytical perspective. We focus on the papers presented at the European and US NKOS workshops and in addition four special issues on NKOS in the last 16 years. For this purpose, we have generated an open dataset, the “NKOS bibliography” which covers the bibliographic information of the research output. We analyze the co-authorship network of this community which results in 123 papers with a sum of 256 distinct authors. We use standard network analytic measures such as degree, betweenness and closeness centrality to describe the co-authorship network of the NKOS dataset. First, we investigate global properties of the network over time. Second, we analyze the centrality of the authors in the NKOS network. Lastly, we investigate gender differences in collaboration behavior in this community. Our results show that apart from differences in centrality measures of the scholars, they have higher tendency to collaborate with those in the same institution or the same geographic proximity. We also find that homophily is higher among women in this community. Apart from small differences in closeness and clustering among men and women, we do not find any significant dissimilarities with respect to other centralities.

Keywords

NKOS workshops Network analysis Co-authorship networks Gender Homophily Collaboration 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank our colleague Marcia Lei Zeng (Kent State University) who provided us with internal information about the US NKOS workshops. This work was partly funded by DFG, Grant No. SU 647/19-1; the “Opening Scholarly Communication in the Social Sciences” (OSCOSS) project at GESIS.

References

  1. 1.
    Barabási, A.L.: Scale-free networks: a decade and beyond. Science 325(5939), 412–413 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blondel, V.D., Guillaume, J.L., Lambiotte, R., Lefebvre, E.: Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. J Stat Mech Theory Exp 2008(10), P10008 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Burt, R.S.: Structural holes and good ideas. Am J Sociol 110(2), 349–399 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cranefield, S.: Networked knowledge representation and exchange using UML and RDF. J. Dig. Inf. (2001). https://journals.tdl.org/jodi/index.php/jodi/article/view/30
  5. 5.
    Doerr, M.: Semantic problems of thesaurus mapping. J. Dig. Inf. (2001). https://journals.tdl.org/jodi/index.php/jodi/article/view/31
  6. 6.
    Evans, T.S., Lambiotte, R., Panzarasa, P.: Community structure and patterns of scientific collaboration in business and management. Scientometrics 89(1), 381–396 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0439-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Freeman, L.C.: Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Soc. Netw. 1(3), 215–239 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hill, L., Koch, T.: Networked Knowledge Organization Systems: introduction to a special issue. J. Dig. Inf. 1(8) (2001). https://journals.tdl.org/jodi/index.php/jodi/article/view/32/33
  9. 9.
    Hodge, G.: Systems of knowledge organization for digital libraries: beyond traditional authority files (2000). https://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub91/pub91.pdf
  10. 10.
    Iyer, S., Killingback, T., Sundaram, B., Wang, Z.: Attack robustness and centrality of complex networks. PloS ONE 8(4), e59613 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jadidi, M., Karimi, F., Wagner, C.: Gender disparities in science? dropout, productivity, collaborations and success of male and female computer scientists (2017). arXiv preprint arXiv:1704.05801
  12. 12.
    Karimi, F., Génois, M., Wagner, C., Singer, P., Strohmaier, M.: Visibility of minorities in social networks (2017). arXiv preprint arXiv:1702.00150
  13. 13.
    Karimi, F., Wagner, C., Lemmerich, F., Jadidi, M., Strohmaier, M.: Inferring gender from names on the web: A comparative evaluation of gender detection methods. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference Companion on World Wide Web. pp. 53–54. International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee (2016)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mayr, P., Tudhope, D., Clarke, S.D., Zeng, M.L., Lin, X.: Recent applications of Knowledge Organization Systems: introduction to a special issue. Int. J. Dig. Libr. 17(1), 1–4 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-015-0167-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mayr, P., Tudhope, D., Golub, K., Wartena, C., De Luca, E.W.: Proceedings of the 15th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) Workshop. CEUR-WS.org (2016). http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1676/
  16. 16.
    Mayr, P., Tudhope, D., Golub, K., Wartena, C., De Luca, E.W.: Proceedings of the 17th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) Workshop. CEUR-WS.org (2017). http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1937/
  17. 17.
    Miles, A., Bechhofer, S.: SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System Reference (2009). https://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/
  18. 18.
    Momeni, F., Mayr, P.: Analyzing the research output presented at European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems Workshops (2000–2015). In: Proceedings of the 15th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems Workshop (NKOS 2016). pp. 7–14. CEUR-WS.org, Hannover, Germany (2016). http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1676/paper1.pdf
  19. 19.
    Newman, M.E.: Assortative mixing in networks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 89(20), 208701 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Opsahl, T., Agneessens, F., Skvoretz, J.: Node centrality in weighted networks: generalizing degree and shortest paths. Soc. Netw. 32(3), 245–251 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2010.03.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Soergel, D., Lauser, B., Liang, A., Fisseha, F., Keizer, J., Katz, S.: Reengineering thesauri for new applications: the agrovoc example. J. Dig. Inf. (2004). https://journals.tdl.org/jodi/index.php/jodi/article/view/112
  22. 22.
    Trant, J.: with the participants in the steve.museum project: exploring the potential for social tagging and folksonomy in art museums: Proof of concept. New Rev. Hypermed. Multimed. (2006). http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13614560600802940
  23. 23.
    Tudhope, D., Alani, H., Jones, C.: Augmenting thesaurus relationships: possibilities for retrieval. J. Dig. Inf. (2001). https://journals.tdl.org/jodi/index.php/jodi/article/view/181/160
  24. 24.
    Tudhope, D., Koch, T.: New applications of knowledge organization systems: introduction to a special issue. J. Dig. Inf. 4(4) (2004). https://journals.tdl.org/jodi/index.php/jodi/article/view/109/108
  25. 25.
    Tudhope, D., Lykke Nielsen, M.: Introduction to Knowledge Organization Systems and Services. New Rev. Hypermed. Multimed. 12(1), 3–9 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zeng, M.L., Chan, L.M.: Trends and issues in establishing interoperability among knowledge organization systems. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 55(3), 377–395 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social SciencesCologneGermany

Personalised recommendations