Advertisement

Scientometrics

, Volume 113, Issue 3, pp 1385–1405 | Cite as

Does academic collaboration equally benefit impact of research across topics? The case of agricultural, resource, environmental and ecological economics

  • Maksym PolyakovEmail author
  • Serhiy Polyakov
  • Md Sayed Iftekhar
Article

Abstract

In this paper, we analyse the effects of different types of formal collaboration and research topics on research impact of academic articles in the area of agricultural, resource, environmental, and ecological economics. The research impact is measured by the number of times an article has been cited each year since publication. The topics within the area of research are modelled using latent semantic analysis. We distinguish between the effect of institutional, national, and international collaboration. We use statistical models for count data and control for the impacts of journals, publication year, and years since publication. We find that, holding other factors constant, collaboration in the form of co-authorship increases research impact. The effect of inter-institutional collaboration within same country is similar to the effect of collaboration within same institution. However, international collaboration results in additional increase in impact. We find that the topic of a paper substantially influences number of citations and identified which topics are associated with greater impact. The effects of different types of collaboration on citations also vary across topics.

Keywords

International collaboration Citation Co-authorship Topic modelling Negative binomial Mixed model 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank the participants at the Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society conference in Rotorua, New Zealand for their helpful feedback. Funding support from the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions is gratefully acknowledged. Useful comments from the Editor and two anonymous Reviewers have greatly improved the manuscript.

References

  1. Aksnes, D. W. (2003). Characteristics of highly cited papers. Research Evaluation, 12(3), 159–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Albarrán, P., Carrasco, R., & Ruiz-Castillo, J. (2017). Geographic mobility and research productivity in a selection of top world economics departments. Scientometrics, 111(1), 241–265. doi: 10.1007/s11192-017-2245-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Azoulay, P., Stuart, T., & Wang, Y. (2013). Matthew: Effect or fable? Management Science, 60(1), 92–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blei, D. M., Ng, A. Y., & Jordan, M. I. (2003). Latent Dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3(4–5), 993–1022.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Brookshire, D. S., & Scrogin, D. O. (2000). Reflections upon 25 years of the Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 39(3), 249–263. doi: 10.1006/jeem.1999.1114.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Brorsen, B. W. (2009). Research: Are we valuing the right stuff? Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 34(1), 1–10.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. Burton, M., & Phimister, E. (1996). The ranking of agricultural economics journals. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 47(1), 109–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cainelli, G., Maggioni, M. A., Uberti, T. E., & de Felice, A. (2015). The strength of strong ties: How co-authorship affect productivity of academic economists? Scientometrics, 102(1), 673–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1(2), 245–276. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr0102_10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chung, K. H., Cox, R. A., & Kim, K. A. (2009). On the relation between intellectual collaboration and intellectual output: Evidence from the finance academe. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 49(3), 893–916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Costanza, R., Howarth, R. B., Kubiszewski, I., Liu, S., Ma, C., Plumecocq, G., et al. (2016). Influential publications in ecological economics revisited. Ecological Economics, 123, 68–76. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.01.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Debertin, D. L., & Pagoulatos, A. (1992). Research in agricultural economics 1919–1990: Seventy-two years of change. Review of Agricultural Economics, 14(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Deerwester, S., Dumais, S. T., Furnas, G. W., Landauer, T. K., & Harshman, R. (1990). Indexing by latent semantic analysis. Journal of the American society for information science, 41(6), 391–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Didegah, F., & Thelwall, M. (2013). Which factors help authors produce the highest impact research? Collaboration, journal and document properties. Journal of Informetrics, 7(4), 861–873. doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2013.08.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Evangelopoulos, N., Zhang, X., & Prybutok, V. R. (2012). Latent semantic analysis: Five methodological recommendations. European Journal of Information Systems, 21(1), 70–86. doi: 10.1057/ejis.2010.61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Feinerer, I., Hornik, K., & Meyer, D. (2008). Text mining infrastructure in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 25(5), 1–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Franceschet, M., & Costantini, A. (2010). The effect of scholar collaboration on impact and quality of academic papers. Journal of Informetrics, 4(4), 540–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Furnas, G. W., Deerwester, S., Dumais, S. T., Landauer, T. K., Harshman, R. A., & Streeter, L. A., et al. (1988). Information retrieval using a singular value decomposition model of latent semantic structure. In Proceedings of the 11th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, 1988 (pp. 465–480). ACM.Google Scholar
  19. Gazni, A., & Didegah, F. (2011). Investigating different types of research collaboration and citation impact: A case study of Harvard University’s publications. Scientometrics, 87(2), 251–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Glänzel, W. (2001). National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations. Scientometrics, 51(1), 69–115. doi: 10.1023/A:1010512628145.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. Griffiths, T. L., & Steyvers, M. (2004). Finding scientific topics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(suppl 1), 5228–5235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hanssen, T.-E. S., & Jørgensen, F. (2014). Citation counts in transportation research. European Transport Research Review, 6(2), 205–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hara, N., Solomon, P., Kim, S.-L., & Sonnenwald, D. H. (2003). An emerging view of scientific collaboration: Scientists’ perspectives on collaboration and factors that impact collaboration. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(10), 952–965. doi: 10.1002/asi.10291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hilmer, C. E., & Lusk, J. L. (2009). Determinants of citations to the agricultural and applied economics association journals. Review of Agricultural Economics, 31(4), 677–694. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9353.2009.01461.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hoepner, A. G. F., Kant, B., Scholtens, B., & Yu, P. S. (2012). Environmental and ecological economics in the 21st century: An age adjusted citation analysis of the influential articles, journals, authors and institutions. Ecological Economics, 77, 193–206. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.03.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jamali, H. R., & Nikzad, M. (2011). Article title type and its relation with the number of downloads and citations. Scientometrics, 88(2), 653–661. doi: 10.1007/s11192-011-0412-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Katz, J. S., & Hicks, D. (1997). How much is a collaboration worth? A calibrated bibliometric model. Scientometrics, 40(3), 541–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kolstad, C. D., Carraro, C., Kahn, M. E., & Stavins, R. (2011). The impact of REEP. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 5(1), 1–2. doi: 10.1093/reep/req025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Laband, D. N., & Piette, M. J. (1995). Team production in economics: Division of labor or mentoring? Labour Economics, 2(1), 33–40. doi: 10.1016/0927-5371(95)80005-i.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Laband, D. N., & Tollison, R. D. (2000). Intellectual collaboration. Journal of Political Economy, 108(3), 632–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Laband, D. N., & Tollison, R. D. (2006). Alphabetized coauthorship. Applied Economics, 38(14), 1649–1653. doi: 10.1080/00036840500427007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Laudel, G. (2002). What do we measure by co-authorships? Research Evaluation, 11(1), 3–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Leimu, R., & Koricheva, J. (2005). Does scientific collaboration increase the impact of ecological articles? BioScience, 55(5), 438–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Najman, J. M., & Hewitt, B. (2003). The validity of publication and citation counts for sociology and other selected disciplines. Journal of Sociology, 39(1), 62–80. doi: 10.1177/144078330303900106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nowell, C., & Grijalva, T. (2011). Trends in co-authorship in economics since 1985. Applied Economics, 43(28), 4369–4375. doi: 10.1080/00036846.2010.491458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pan, R. K., Kaski, K., & Fortunato, S. (2012). World citation and collaboration networks: Uncovering the role of geography in science. Scientific Reports, 2, 902. doi: 10.1038/srep00902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pielou, E. C. (1966). The measurement of diversity in different types of biological collections. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 13(C), 131–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Polyakov, M., Chalak, M., Iftekhar, M. S., Pandit, R., Tapsuwan, S., Zhang, F., et al. (2017). Authorship, collaboration, topics, and research gaps in Environmental and Resource Economics 1991–2015. Environmental and Resource Economics. doi: 10.1007/s10640-017-0147-2. (in press).Google Scholar
  39. Polyakov, M., Gibson, F. L., & Pannell, D. J. (2016). Antipodean agricultural and resource economics at 60: Trends in topics, authorship and collaboration. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 60(4), 506–515. doi: 10.1111/1467-8489.12152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Priam, T. T., Maillot, N. E., Lim, J. H., & Chevallet, J. P. (2007). Latent semantic fusion model for image retrieval and annotation. In International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2007 (pp. 439–444). doi: 10.1145/1321440.1321503.
  41. Qiu, Y. (2016). Package ‘RSpectra’: Solvers for Large Scale Eigenvalue and SVD Problems (0.11-0 ed.). CRAN.Google Scholar
  42. Robson, B. J., & Mousquès, A. (2016). Can we predict citation counts of environmental modelling papers? Fourteen bibliographic and categorical variables predict less than 30% of the variability in citation counts. Environmental Modelling and Software, 75, 94–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rousseau, S., Verbeke, T., & Rousseau, R. (2009). Evaluating environmental and resource economics journals: A TOP-curve approach. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 3(2), 270–287. doi: 10.1093/reep/rep002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Salton, G., & Buckley, C. (1988). Term-weighting approaches in automatic text retrieval. Information Processing and Management, 24(5), 513–523. doi: 10.1016/0306-4573(88)90021-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schymura, M., & Löschel, A. (2014). Incidence and extent of co-authorship in environmental and resource economics: Evidence from the Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. Scientometrics, 99(3), 631–661. doi: 10.1007/s11192-014-1248-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sergi, B., Parker, R., & Zuckerman, B. (2014). Support for international collaboration in research: The role of the overseas offices of basic science funders. Review of Policy Research, 31(5), 430–453. doi: 10.1111/ropr.12088.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sidorova, A., Evangelopoulos, N., Valacich, J. S., & Ramakrishnan, T. (2008). Uncovering the intellectual core of the information systems discipline. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 32(3), 467–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sin, S. C. J. (2011). International coauthorship and citation impact: A bibliometric study of six LIS journals, 1980–2008. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(9), 1770–1783. doi: 10.1002/asi.21572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sud, P., & Thelwall, M. (2016). Not all international collaboration is beneficial: The Mendeley readership and citation impact of biochemical research collaboration. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(8), 1849–1857. doi: 10.1002/asi.23515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tahamtan, I., Safipour Afshar, A., & Ahamdzadeh, K. (2016). Factors affecting number of citations: A comprehensive review of the literature. Scientometrics, 107(3), 1195–1225. doi: 10.1007/s11192-016-1889-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Thelwall, M., & Kousha, K. (2015). ResearchGate: Disseminating, communicating, and measuring scholarship? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(5), 876–889. doi: 10.1002/asi.23236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Vanclay, J. K. (2013). Factors affecting citation rates in environmental science. Journal of Informetrics, 7(2), 265–271. doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2012.11.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Visinescu, L. L., & Evangelopoulos, N. (2014). Orthogonal rotations in latent semantic analysis: An empirical study. Decision Support Systems, 62, 131–143. doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2014.03.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wagner, C. S. (2005). Six case studies of international collaboration in science. Scientometrics, 62(1), 3–26. doi: 10.1007/s11192-005-0001-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Westgate, M. J., Barton, P. S., Pierson, J. C., & Lindenmayer, D. B. (2015). Text analysis tools for identification of emerging topics and research gaps in conservation science. Conservation Biology, 29(6), 1606–1614. doi: 10.1111/cobi.12605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Winson-Geideman, K., & Evangelopoulos, N. (2013). Research in real estate, 1973–2010: A three-journal comparison. Journal of Real Estate Literature, 21(2), 255–267.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Environmental Economics and Policy, UWA School of Agriculture and EnvironmentThe University of Western AustraliaCrawleyAustralia
  2. 2.Distributed eLibraryWeill Cornell Medicine-QatarDohaQatar

Personalised recommendations