, Volume 78, Issue 2, pp 323–345 | Cite as

Co-authorship networks in social sciences: The case of Turkey

  • Cédric Gossart
  • Müge Özman


We analyse the co-authorship networks of researchers affiliated at universities in Turkey by using two databases: the international SSCI database and the Turkish ULAKBIM database. We find that co-authorship networks are composed largely of isolated groups and there is little intersection between the two databases, permitting little knowledge diffusion. There seems to be two disparate populations of researchers. While some scholars publish mostly in the international journals, others target the national audience, and there is very little intersection between the two populations. The same observation is valid for universities, among which there is very little collaboration. Our results point out that while Turkish social sciences and humanities publications have been growing impressively in the last decade, domestic networks to ensure the dissemination of knowledge and of research output are very weak and should be supported by domestic policies.


Turkey Betweenness Centrality Research Collaboration Patent Citation Scientific Collaboration 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adams, J. D., Black, G. C., Clemmons, J. R., Stephan, P. E., (2005). Scientific teams and institutional collaborations: Evidence from U.S. universities (1981–1999), Research Policy, 34: 259–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Almeida, P., Kogut, B., (1998). Localization of Knowledge and the Mobility of Engineers in Regional Networks, Management Science, 45: 905–917CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Butler, L., (2003). Explaining Australia’s increased share of ISI publications: The effects of a funding formula based on publication counts. Research Policy 32, 143–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen, C. and Hicks D., (2004). Tracing knowledge diffusion, Scientometrics, 59: 199–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Callon, M., (1991). Vers des archipels de la science, Science et Technologie, 34: 66–69.Google Scholar
  6. Glänzel, W., Schlemmer, B. (2007). National research profiles in a changing Europe (1983–2003): An exploratory study of sectoral characteristics in the Triple Helix, Scientometrics, 70: 267–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gomez, I., Fernandez, M. T., Sebastian, J., (1999). Analysis of the structure of international scientific cooperation networks through bibliometric indicators. Scientometrics, 44: 441–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gülgöz, S., Yedekçioǧlu, Ö. A., Yurtsever, E., (2002). Turkey’s output in social science publications, Scientometrics, 55: 103–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hicks, D., (1999). The difficulty of achieving full coverage of international social science literature and the bibliometric consequences, Scientometrics, 44: 193–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jaffe, A. B., Trajtenberg, M., Henderson, R., (1993). Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108: 577–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kabasakal, H., Bodur, M., (2006). Leadership and Culture in Turkey: A Multi-faceted Phenomenon, In: Chhokar, J., Brodbeck, F., R. House (Eds), Managerial Cultures of the World: A GLOBE Report of In-depth Studies of the Cultures of 25 Countries. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.Google Scholar
  12. Katz, J. S., Martin, B. R., (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26: 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lee, S., Bozeman, B., (2005). The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity, Social Studies of Science, 35: 703–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Luukkonen, T., Persson, O., Sivertsen, G., (1992). Understanding the patterns of international scientific collaboration, Science, Technology, & Human Values, 17: 101–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Melin, G., (2000). Pragmatism and self-organization research collaboration on the individual level”, Research Policy, 29: 31–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Merton, R. K., (1973). The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  17. Moody, J., (2004). The structure of a social science collaboration network: Disciplinary cohesion from 1963 to 1999, American Sociological Review, 69: 213–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Norgaard, R., (2004). Learning and knowing collectively, Ecological Economics, 49: 231–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Otte, E., Rousseau, R., (2002). Social network analysis: A powerful strategy, also for the information science, Journal of Information Science, 28: 441–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Persson, O., Melin, G., Danell, R., Kaloudis, A., (1997). Research collaboration at Nordic universities, Scientometrics, 39: 209–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Singh, J., (2005). Collaborative networks as determinants of knowledge diffusion patterns, Management Science, 51: 756–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Solla Price, D., Beaver, D., (1966). Collaboration in an invisible college, American Psychologist, 21: 1011–1018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sonnenwald, D. H., (2007). Scientific collaboration: A synthesis of challenges and strategies, Annual review of information Science and Technology, 41 (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  24. Sorenson, O., Fleming, L., (2004). Science and the diffusion of knowledge, Research Policy, 33: 1615–1634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Uzun, A., (1998). A scientometric profile of social sciences research in Turkey, International Information & Library Review, 30: 169–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wagner, C.S., (2006). International collaboration in science and technology: Promises and pitfalls, In: Box, L., Engelhard, R., (Eds), Science and Technology Policy for Development: Dialogues at the Interface. Anthem Press, London.Google Scholar
  27. Wagner, C. S., Leydesdorff, L., (2005a). Mapping the network of global science: Comparing international co-authorships from 1990 to 2000, International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, 1: 185–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wagner, C. S., Leydesdorff, L., (2005b). Network structure, self-organisation, and the growth of international collaboration in science, Research Policy, 34: 1608–1618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wulf, W. A., (1993). The collaboratory opportunity, Science, 261: 854–855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Yurtsever, E., Gülgöz, S., (1999). The increase in the rate of publications originating from Turkey, Scientometrics, 46: 321–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zitt, M., Bassecoulard, E., Okubo, Y., (2000). Shadows of the past in international cooperation: Collaboration profiles of the top five producers of science, Scientometrics, 47: 627–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institut TELECOM, TELECOM & Management Sud ParisETOS / CEMANTICEvryFrance
  2. 2.Bureau d’Economie Théorique et AppliquéeUniversite Louis PasteurStrasbourg CedexFrance
  3. 3.Science and Technology Policy StudiesMiddle East Technical UniversityAnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations