Advertisement

Scientometrics

, Volume 97, Issue 3, pp 535–553 | Cite as

The relationship between research performance and international collaboration in chemistry

  • Maki Kato
  • Asao Ando
Article

Abstract

The number of internationally co-authored articles have significantly increased in recent years and now receive more citations than domestic works. Abramo et al. (Scientometrics 86:629–643, 2011b) investigated scholars in Italian universities and found a positive correlation between their research performance and degree of internationalization. This study uses a data set in chemistry to examine the robustness of the results presented by Abramo et al. (Scientometrics 86:629–643, 2011b) and the relationship between international collaboration and mobility among researchers. The results confirmed the robustness of the previous study and raised the possibility that the higher citation rate of international papers is not solely explained by the higher performance of researchers. Therefore, international research collaboration seems to exert some kind of “bonus” effect because of internationalization. The results also indicate that researchers who collaborate internationally accumulate science and technology human capital through collaboration. A positive relationship between the international mobility of researchers and their performance is also shown although the direction of the cause and effect is not yet clear.

Keywords

International co-authorship Research performance Bibliometrics Chemistry Research collaboration 

JEL Classification

D83 O31 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (KAKENHI) (22500238).

References

  1. Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Di Costa, F. (2011a). Research productivity: Are higher academic ranks more productive than lower ones? Scientometrics, 88(3), 915–928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abramo, G., D’angelo, C. A., & Solazzi, M. (2011b). The relationship between scientists’ research performance and the degree of internationalization of their research. Scientometrics, 86(3), 629–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adams, J. D., Black, G. C., Clemmons, J. R., & Stephan, P. E. (2005). Scientific teams and institutional collaboration: Evidence from US universities, 1981–1999. Research Policy, 34(3), 259–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beaver, D. D. (2001). Reflections on scientific collaboration (and its study): Past, present, and future. Scientometrics, 52(3), 365–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bell, R. K., Hill, D., & Lehming, R. F. (2007). The changing research and publication environment in American research universities. NSF working paper. SRS 07-204. Retrieved September, 13 2010, from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/srs07204/pdf/srs07204.pdf.
  6. BIS. (2011). International comparative performance of the UK research base 2011. Retrieved August, 28 2012 from http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/science/docs/i/11-p123-international-comparative-performance-uk-research-base-2011.
  7. Bozeman, B., & Corley, E. A. (2004). Scientists’ collaboration strategies: Implications for scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy, 33(4), 599–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bozeman, B., Dietz, J. S., & Gaughan, M. (2001). Scientific and technical human capital: An alternative model for research evaluation. International Journal of Technology Management, 22(7), 716–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110(2), 349–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carayol, N., & Matt, M. (2006). Individual and collective determinants of academic scientists’ productivity. Information Economics and Policy, 18(1), 55–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Choi, S. (2012). Core-periphery, new clusters, or rising stars?: International scientific collaboration among ‘advanced’ countries in the era of globalization. Scientometrics, 90(1), 25–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. David, P. A. (1994). Positive feedbacks and research productivity in science: reopening another black box. In O. Grandstrand (Ed.), Economics of technology (pp. 65–89). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  13. Defazio, D., Lockett, A., & Wright, M. (2009). Funding incentives, collaborative dynamics and scientific productivity: Evidence from the EU framework program. Research Policy, 38(2), 293–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dietz, J. S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). Academic careers, patents, and productivity: Industry experience as scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy, 34(3), 349–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ding, Y. (2011). Scientific collaboration and endorsement: Network analysis of coauthorship and citation networks. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 187–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Duque, R. B., Ynalvez, M., Sooryamoorthy, R., Mbatia, P., Dzorgbo, D. S., & Shrum, W. (2005). Collaboration paradox: Scientific productivity, the internet, and problems of research in developing areas. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 755–785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Glänzel, W. (2001). National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations. Scientometrics, 51(1), 69–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2001). Double effort = double impact? A critical view at international co-authorship in chemistry. Scientometrics, 50(2), 199–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Glänzel, W., Schubert, A., & Czerwon, H. J. (1999). A bibliometric analysis of international scientific cooperation of the European union (1985–1995). Scientometrics, 45(2), 185–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Huang, M. H., Tang, M. C., & Chen, D. Z. (2011). Inequality of publishing performance and international collaboration in physics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(6), 1156–1165.Google Scholar
  21. Kato, M. (2011). Analysis on career paths of the most highly cited scientists in Japan through international comparison. Discussion paper no. 78. NISTEP.Google Scholar
  22. Kato, M., & Chayama, H. (2010). Analysis on research activities in developing countries and international networking of researchers. Research material 178. NISTEP.Google Scholar
  23. Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kretschmer, H. (1994). Coauthorship networks of invisible colleges and institutionalized communities. Scientometrics, 30(1), 363–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Laudel, G. (2002). Collaboration and reward: What do we measure by co-authorships? Research Evaluation, 11(1), 3–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lee, S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 673–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Levin, S. G., & Stephan, P. E. (1991). Research productivity over the life cycle: Evidence for academic scientists. The American Economic Review, 81(1), 114–132.Google Scholar
  28. Muraoka, T., Nishina, K., Fukao, Y., Chinami, K., & Otani, S. (2003). The choice of language for international graduate students in scientific fields. Journal of Technical Japanese Education, 5, 55–60.Google Scholar
  29. Nagpaul, P. S. (2003). Exploring a pseudo-regression model of transnational cooperation in science. Scientometrics, 56(3), 403–416.Google Scholar
  30. NISTEP. (2011). Japanese science and technology indicators 2011. Research material No.198. NISTEP.Google Scholar
  31. Ordóñez-Matamoros, G. (2008). International research collaboration, research team performance, and scientific and technological capabilities in Colombia-A bottom-up perspective. Paper presented in the IV Globelics Conference at Mexico City, September 22–24.Google Scholar
  32. Regets, M. C. (2007). Research issues in the international migration of highly skilled workers: A perspective with data from the United States. NSF Working paper SRS 07-203. Retrieved 28, August 2012, from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/srs07203/.
  33. Sandström, U. (2009). Combining curriculum vitae and bibliometric analysis: mobility, gender and research performance. Research Evaluation, 18(2), 135–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schmoch, U., & Schubert, T. (2008). Are international co-publication an indicator for quality of scientific research? Scientometrics, 74(3), 361–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Stephan, P. E. (2008). Job market effects on scientific productivity. Retrieved 28, August 2012, from http://www.cso.edu/upload/PDF_rencontres/SEM_ES_Paula-Stephan.pdf.
  36. Ubfal, D., & Maffioli, A. (2011). The impact of funding on research collaboration: Evidence from developing country. Research Policy, 40(9), 1269–1279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Van Raan, A. F. J. (2004). Measuring science: capita selecta of current main issues. In H. F. Moed, W. Glänzel, & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative science and technology research: The use of publication and patent statistics in studies on S&T systems (pp. 19–50). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  38. Vinkler, P. (2011). Application of the distribution of citations among publications in scientometric evaluations. Journal of American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(10), 1963–1978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wagner, C. S. (2008). The new invisible college: Science for development. Washington: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
  40. Wuchty, S., Benjamin, J. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036–1039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 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(3), 627–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Institute of Science and Technology Policy (NISTEP), Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Graduate School of Information SciencesTohoku UniversitySendaiJapan

Personalised recommendations