Skip to main content
Log in

Evaluating scholars based on their academic collaboration activities: two indices, the RC-index and the CC-index, for quantifying collaboration activities of researchers and scientific communities

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript


Although there are many studies for quantifying the academic performance of researchers, such as measuring the scientific performance based on the number of publications, there are no studies about quantifying the collaboration activities of researchers. This study addresses this shortcoming. Based on three measures, namely the collaboration network structure of researchers, the number of collaborations with other researchers, and the productivity index of co-authors, two new indices, the RC-Index and CC-Index, are proposed for quantifying the collaboration activities of researchers and scientific communities. After applying these indices on a data set generated from publication lists of five schools of information systems, this study concludes with a discussion of the shortcomings and advantages of these indices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others






  • Abbasi, A., & Altmann, J. (2009). AcaSoNet: Social network system for the academic community. TEMEP Working Paper Series, Seoul National University, South Korea.

  • Altmann, J., Abbasi, A., & Hwang, J. (2009). Evaluating the productivity of researchers and their communities: The RP-index and the CP-index. International Journal of Computer Science and Applications, 6(2), 104–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Batista, P. D., Campiteli, M. G., & Kinounchi, O. (2006). Is it possible to compare researchers with different scientific interests? Scientometrics, 68(1), 179–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgman, C., & Furner, J. (2002). Scholarly communication and bibliometrics. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36, 3–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, T., Glanzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2005). A Hirsch-type index for journals. The Scientist, 19(22), 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dainesi, S. M., & Pietrobon, R. (2007). Scientific indicators of productivity: Time for action. Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria [Online], 29(2), 100–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egghe, L. (2006). Theory and practice of the g-Index. Scientometrics, 69(1), 131–152.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(46), 16569–16572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, Y. (2008). Locating active actors in the scientific collaboration communities based on interaction topology analyses. Scientometrics, 74(3), 471–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jin, B. H. (2006). h-Index: An evaluation indicator proposed by scientist. Science Focus, 1(1), 8–9. (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kousha, K., & Thelwall, M. (2007). Google scholar citations and Google Web/URL citations: A multi-discipline exploratory analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(7), 1055–1065.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laudel, G. (2002). What do we measure by co-authorships? Research Evaluation, 11(13), 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leclerc, M., & Gagn, J. (1994). International Scientific Cooperation: The continentalization of science. Scientometrics, 31(3), 261–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann, S., Jackson, A. D., & Lautrup, B. (2006). Measures for measure. Nature, 444, 1003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melin, G. (2000). Pragmatism and self-organization research collaboration on the individual level. Research Policy, 29(1), 31–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melin, G., & Persson, O. (1996). Studying research collaboration using co-authorships. Scientometrics, 36, 363–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prathap, G. (2006). Hirsch-type indices for ranking institutions’ scientific research output. Current Science, 91(11), 1439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruane, F. P., & Tol, R. S. J. (2008). Rational (successive) h-indices: An application to economics in the Republic of Ireland. Scientometrics, 75(2), 395–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schubert, A. (2007). Successive h-indices. Scientometrics, 70(1), 201–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sidiropoulos, A., Katsaros, D., & Manolopoulos, Y. (2007). Generalized h-index for disclosing latent facts in citation networks. Scientometrics, 72(2), 253–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suresh, V., Raghupathy, N., Shekar, B., & Madhavan, C. E. V. (2007). Discovering mentorship information from author collaboration networks. Lecture notes in computer science. Discovery Science, 4755, 197–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tol, R. S. J. (2008). A rational, successive g-index applied to economics departments in Ireland. Journal of Informetrics, 2, 149–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Raan, A. F. J. (2006). Measuring science. In H. F. Moed, W. Glanzel, & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research. Germany: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziman, J. (1994). Prometheus bound, science in a dynamic steady state. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references


This paper was partly funded by Ministry of Knowledge Economy of the Republic of Korea.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jörn Altmann.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Abbasi, A., Altmann, J. & Hwang, J. Evaluating scholars based on their academic collaboration activities: two indices, the RC-index and the CC-index, for quantifying collaboration activities of researchers and scientific communities. Scientometrics 83, 1–13 (2010).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:


JEL Classification