Advertisement

Electronic Markets

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 19–40 | Cite as

Co-authorship networks in electronic markets research

  • Kai Fischbach
  • Johannes PutzkeEmail author
  • Detlef Schoder
Special Theme - Invited Paper

Abstract

This article examines co-authorship networks of researchers publishing in Electronic Markets—The International Journal of Networked Business (EM). The authors visualize the co-authorship network and provide descriptive statistics regarding the degree to which researchers are embedded in the co-authorship network. They develop and test seven hypotheses associating the researchers’ embeddedness in the co-authorship network with the number of the researchers’ citations. Results indicate that author who publish co-authored articles in EM have their EM articles (whether co-authored or not) cited more frequently than those who publish EM articles only in their own names, and that the more they co-author the more they are cited because they are located in the center of a co-authorship network.

Keywords

Bibliometrics Centrality Citation analysis Scientometrics Social network Structural holes 

JEL

M15 

Supplementary material

12525_2011_51_MOESM1_ESM.doc (441 kb)
ESM 1 (DOC 452 kb)

References

  1. Agarwal, R., Gupta, A. K., & Kraut, R. (2008). The interplay between digital and social networks. Information Systems Research, 19(3), 243–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alba, R. D. (1973). A graph-theoretic definition of a sociometric clique. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 3(1), 113–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Antaki, G. (2000). Internet development in Lebanon. Electronic Markets, 10(2), 147–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Backhaus, K., Becker, J. R., Beverungen, D., Frohs, M., Müller, O., Weddeling, M., et al. (2010). Enabling individualized recommendations and dynamic pricing of value-added services through willingness-to-pay data. Electronic Markets, 20(2), 131–146.Google Scholar
  5. Balaban, A., & Klein, D. (2002). Co-authorship, rational Erdős numbers, and resistance distances in graphs. Scientometrics, 55(1), 59–70. doi: 10.1023/a:1016098803527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bekele, D. (2000). EthioGift: a unique experience in electronic commerce in Ethiopia. Electronic Markets, 10(2), 146–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bergh, D. D., Perry, J., & Hanke, R. (2006). Some predictors of SMJ article impact. Strategic Management Journal, 27(1), 81–100. doi: 10.1002/smj.504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bonacich, P. (1972). Factoring and weighting approaches to status scores and clique identification. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 2(1), 113–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bonacich, P. (1987). Power and centrality: a family of measures.. The American Journal of Sociology, 92(5), 1170–1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bonacich, P., & Lloyd, P. (2001). Eigenvector-like measures of centrality for asymmetric relations. Social Networks, 23(3), 191–201. doi: 10.1016/S0378-8733(01)00038-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Borgatti, S. P. (2005). Centrality and network flow. Social Networks, 27(1), 55–71. doi: 10.1016/j.socnet.2004.11.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bron, C., & Kerbosch, J. (1973). Finding all cliques of an undirected graph. Communications of the ACM, 16(9), 575–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brown, D. H., Lockett, N., & Schubert, P. (2005). Preface to the focus theme section ‘SMEs and E-Business’. Electronic Markets, 15(2), 76–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Burt, R. (1995). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Chase, I. (1980). Social process and hierarchy formation in small groups: a comparative perspective. American Sociological Review, 45(6), 905–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cheong, F., & Corbitt, B. (2009). A social network analysis of the co-authorship network of the pacific asia conference on information systems from 1993 to 2008. In PACIS 2009 Proceedings (pp. 23).Google Scholar
  17. Culnan, M. J. (1986). The intellectual development of management information systems, 1972–1982: a co-citation analysis. Management Science, 32(2), 156–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cunningham, S., & Dillon, S. (1997). Authorship patterns in information systems. Scientometrics, 39(1), 19–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dai, Q., & Kauffman, R. J. (2002). B2B E-Commerce revisited: leading perspectives on the key issues and research directions. Electronic Markets, 12(2), 67–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. De Bellis, N. (2009). Bibliometrics and citation analysis: From the Science citation index to cybermetrics. Scarecrow Press.Google Scholar
  21. Dekker, D., Krackhardt, D., & Snijders, T. (2007). Sensitivity of MRQAP tests to collinearity and autocorrelation conditions. Psychometrika, 72(4), 563–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Duan, C., Kung, H., Tung, H., & Tseng, H. (2010). The intellectual structure of modern e-business research: an author co-citation analysis. Research Journal of International Studies, (13), 32–46.Google Scholar
  23. Elektronische Märkte. (1991). Electronic Markets, 1(1), 1–2.Google Scholar
  24. Eto, H. (2002). Authorship and citation patterns in Management Science in comparison with operational research. Scientometrics, 53(3), 337–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fiala, D., Rousselot, F., & Ježek, K. (2008). PageRank for bibliographic networks. Scientometrics, 76(1), 135–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fielt, E., Janssen, W., Faber, E., & Wagenaar, R. (2008). Design trade-offs for electronic intermediaries. Electronic Markets, 18(4), 362–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Floeck, F., Putzke, J., Steinfels, S., Fischbach, K., & Schoder, D. (2011). Imitation and quality of tags in social bookmarking systems—collective intelligence leading to folksonomies. In T. Bastiaens, U. Baumöl, & B. Krämer (Eds.), On collective intelligence (Vol. 76, pp. 75–91, Advances in Soft Computing). Springer Berlin / Heidelberg.Google Scholar
  28. Freeman, L. (1979). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1(3), 215–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Goffman, C. (1969). And what is your Erdös number? American Mathematical Monthly, 76(7), 791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. The American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Heider, F. (1946). Attitudes and cognitive organization. The Journal of Psychology, 21(1), 107–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hinz, O., & Spann, M. (2008). The impact of information diffusion on bidding behavior in secret reserve price auctions. Information Systems Research, 19(3), 351–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569–16572. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0507655102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Holland, P. W., & Leinhardt, S. (1972). Holland and leinhardt reply: some evidence on the transitivity of positive interpersonal sentiment. The American Journal of Sociology, 77(6), 1205–1209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hood, W., & Wilson, C. (2001). The literature of bibliometrics, scientometrics, and informetrics. Scientometrics, 52(2), 291–314. doi: 10.1023/A:1017919924342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ismail, M. M., & El-Nawawy, M. A. (2000). The imminent challenge of click and mortar commerce in Egypt, Africa and the Middle East. Electronic Markets, 10(2), 73–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kaufmann, M., & Wagner, D. (2001). Drawing graphs: Methods and models. Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  38. Kock, N. (2009). The evolution of costly traits through selection and the importance of oral speech in e-collaboration. Electronic Markets, 19(4), 221–232.Google Scholar
  39. LaRowe, G., Ichise, R., & Borner, K. (2007). Analysis of Japanese information systems co-authorship data. In I. Ryutaro, & B. Katy (Eds.), 11th International Conference Information Visualization (IV ’07) (pp. 459–464).Google Scholar
  40. Lechner, U., Stanoevska-Slabeva, K., & Tan, Y.-H. (2000). Editorial. Electronic Markets, 10(4), 213–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Loebbecke, C. (2007). Piloting RFID along the supply chain: a case analysis. Electronic Markets, 17(1), 29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Luce, R. D., & Perry, A. D. (1949). A method of matrix analysis of group structure. Psychometrika, 14, 95–116. doi: 10.1007/bf02289146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Marion, L., Wilson, C., & Davis, M. (2005). Intellectual structure and subject themes in information systems research: a journal cocitation study. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 42(1).Google Scholar
  44. Merton, R. (1968). The Matthew effect in science: the reward and communication systems of science are considered. Science, 159(3810), 56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mokken, R. J. (1979). Cliques, clubs and clans. Quality & Quantity, 13(2), 161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mulvenna, M., Norwood, M., & Büchner, A. (1998). Data-driven marketing. Electronic Markets, 8(3), 32–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Newman, M. E. J. (2004). Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101(Suppl 1), 5200–5205. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0307545100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Odda, T. (1979). On properties of a well-known graph or what is your Ramsey number? Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 328(Topics in Graph Theory), 166–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Oinas-Kukkonen, H., Lyytinen, K., & Yoo, Y. (2010). Social networks and information systems: ongoing and future research streams. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 11(2), 3.Google Scholar
  50. Österle, H., & Heyden, K. (2010). Editorial 20/1. Electronic Markets, 20(1), 1–1.Google Scholar
  51. Österle, H., & Schmelich, V. (2009). Editorial 19/1. Electronic Markets, 19(1), 1–2.Google Scholar
  52. Österle, H., & Schmid, B. F. (2008). Quo vadis electronic markets? Electronic Markets, 18(3), 206–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Otte, E., & Rousseau, R. (2002). Social network analysis: a powerful strategy, also for the information sciences. Journal of Information Science, 28(6), 441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Peng, G., & Woodlock, P. (2009). The impact of network and recency effects on the adoption of e-collaboration technologies in online communities. Electronic Markets, 19(4), 201–210.Google Scholar
  55. Peters, H., & Van Raan, A. (1991). Structuring scientific activities by co-author analysis. Scientometrics, 20(1), 235–255. doi: 10.1007/bf02018157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pinkwart, N., & Olivier, H. (2009). Cooperative virtual worlds—a viable eCollaboration pathway or merely a gaming trend? Electronic Markets, 19(4), 233–236.Google Scholar
  57. Popper, S. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. Hutchinson.Google Scholar
  58. Pries-Heje, J., & Baskerville, R. (2008). The design theory nexus. MIS Quarterly, 32(4), 731–755.Google Scholar
  59. Putzke, J., Fischbach, K., Schoder, D., & Gloor, P. (2010a). The evolution of interaction networks in massively multiplayer online games. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 11(2), 69–94.Google Scholar
  60. Putzke, J., Schoder, D., & Fischbach, K. (2010b). Adoption of mass-customized newspapers: an augmented technology acceptance perspective. Journal of Media Economics, 23(3), 143–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rapoport, A. (1953). Spread of information through a population with socio-structural bias: I. Assumption of transitivity. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 15(4), 523–533.Google Scholar
  62. Schmid, B. F. (1996). Editor’s note. Electronic Markets, 6(2), 2–2.Google Scholar
  63. Schmid, B. F., Selz, D., & Buchet, B. (1999). Editorial. Electronic Markets, 9(1), 1–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Schoder, D., & Haenlein, M. (2004). The relative importance of different trust constructs for sellers in the online world. Electronic Markets, 14(1), 48–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Schulman, E. (1996). How to write a scientific paper. Annals of Improbable Research, 2(5), 8.Google Scholar
  66. Segev, A., Gebauer, J., & Färber, F. (1999). Internet-based electronic markets. Electronic Markets, 9(3), 138–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Sellen, M. (1993). Bibliometrics: An annotated bibliography, 1970–1990. GK Hall Toronto: Maxwell Macmillan Canada, New York: Maxwell Macmillan International, New York.Google Scholar
  68. Shapiro, F. R. (1992). Origins of bibliometrics, citation indexing, and citation analysis: the neglected legal literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43(5), 337–339. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-4571(199206)43:5<337::aid-asi2>3.0.co;2-t.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Stewart, J. A. (1983). Achievement and ascriptive processes in the recognition of scientific articles. Social Forces, 62(1), 166–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Strader, T. J., & Walstrom, K. A. (1999). Special Section: 1998 AIS mini-track on electronic commerce. Electronic Markets, 9(1), 2–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Strader, T. J., Buchet, B., Walstrom, K. A., & Schmid, B. F. (1999). Editorial. Electronic Markets, 9(1), 1–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Stremersch, S., & Verhoef, P. C. (2005). Globalization of authorship in the marketing discipline: does it help or hinder the field? Marketing Science, 24(4), 585–594. doi: 10.1287/mksc.1050.0152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Stremersch, S., Verniers, I., & Verhoef, P. C. (2007). The quest for citations: drivers of article impact. Journal of Marketing, 71(3), 171–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Tan, C.-H., Teo, H.-H., & Xu, H. (2010). Online auction: the effects of transaction probability and listing price on a seller’s decision-making behavior. Electronic Markets, 20(1), 67–79.Google Scholar
  75. Tassabehji, R. (2000). E-Commerce in Dubai: realities and impediments. Electronic Markets, 10(2), 144–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Van Dalen, H. P., & Henkens, K. (2001). What makes a scientific article influential? The case of demographers. Scientometrics, 50(3), 455–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Vidgen, R., Henneberg, S., & Naudé, P. (2007). What sort of community is the European Conference on Information Systems? A social network analysis 1993–2005. European Journal of Information Systems, 16(1), 5–19. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  79. Watts, D., & Strogatz, S. (1998). Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’networks. Nature, 393(6684), 440–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Weinberg, B. H. (1997). The earliest Hebrew citation indexes. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(4), 318–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. WI-Orientierungslisten. (2008). WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, 50(2), 155–163. doi: 10.1365/s11576-008-0040-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Xu, J., & Chau, M. (2006). The social identity of IS: Analyzing the collaboration network of the ICIS conferences (1980–2005). In 27th ICIS Conference, Milwaukee, WI (pp. 569–589).Google Scholar
  83. Xu, H., & Fischbach, K. (2006). Trust formation in the usage of peer-to-peer (P2P) sharing software. In INFORMS Annual Meeting, Pittsburgh, PA, November 5–8 Google Scholar
  84. Xu, H., & Gupta, S. (2009). The effects of privacy concerns and personal innovativeness on potential and experienced customers’ adoption of location-based services. Electronic Markets, 19(2), 137–149.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Information Management, University of St. Gallen 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kai Fischbach
    • 1
  • Johannes Putzke
    • 1
    Email author
  • Detlef Schoder
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Information Systems and Information ManagementUniversity of CologneKölnGermany

Personalised recommendations