Abstract
Basic research progress requires sustainable and healthy development of the academic community. This study aims to examine community development directed by research funding and the impact of top scientists on this development. To complement existing methods of measuring funding performance, which focus mostly on narrow factors such as citation or publications, we provide a new perspective that uses community development to describe the sustainability of both human capital and discipline development in basic research. The clique percolation method, instant-optimal method, and a community life-cycle model are used to describe the development of the academic community based on dynamic scientific collaboration networks. We enhance the existing community life-cycle model with a new stable event for a more realistic and comprehensive view of scientific collaboration. This study uses articles funded by basic research projects to distinguish the output of basic research. Covering all 17 disciplines, 177,909 articles funded by China’s basic research funding Program 973 are used to form a dynamic scientific collaboration network throughout 19 years. Six impacts of top scientists are identified on the development of the basic research community, including attracting collaborators, enhancing the community’s tendency to evolve, making the community exist longer, speeding up the production, strengthening the publishing quality, and enhancing the activeness.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abramo, G., Cicero, T., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2013). The impact of unproductive and top researchers on overall university research performance. Journal of Informetrics, 7(1), 166–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.10.006
Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Soldatenkova, A. (2016). The ratio of top scientists to the academic staff as an indicator of the competitive strength of universities. Journal of Informetrics, 10(2), 596–605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.04.013
Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Soldatenkova, A. (2017). How long do top scientists maintain their stardom? An analysis by region, gender and discipline: Evidence from Italy. Scientometrics, 110(2), 867–877. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2193-x
Arnott, J. C., Neuenfeldt, R. J., & Lemos, M. C. (2020). Co-producing science for sustainability: Can funding change knowledge use? Global Environmental Change, 60, 101979. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.101979
Åström, F., Hedenfalk, I., Graffner, M., & Nilbert, M. (2013). Effects of research funding, gender and type of position on research collaboration networks: A micro-level study of cancer research at Lund University. Proceedings of ISSI 2013 - 14th International Society of Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference, 1, 677–689.
Asur, S., Parthasarathy, S., & Ucar, D. (2007). An event-based framework for characterizing the evolutionary behavior of interaction graphs. Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 2(3), 913–921. https://doi.org/10.1145/1281192.1281290
Aynaud, T., Fleury, E., Guillaume, J. L., & Wang, Q. (2013). Communities in evolving networks: Definitions, detection, and analysis techniques. Modeling and Simulation in Science, Engineering and Technology, 55, 159–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6729-8_9
Azoulay, P., Zivin, J. S. G., & Wang, J. (2010). SUPERSTAR EXTINCTION. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125(2), 549–589.
Barabási, A. L., Jeong, H., Néda, Z., Ravasz, E., Schubert, A., & Vicsek, T. (2002). Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations. Physica a: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 311(3–4), 590–614. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4371(02)00736-7
Cole, J. R., & Cole, S. (1972). The ortega hypothesis citation analysis suggests that only a few scientists contribute to scientific progress. Science, 178, 368–376.
de Solla Price, D., & de Beaver, D. (1966). Collaboration in an invisible college. The American Psychologist, 21(11), 1011–1018. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/5921694
Erridge, P. (2006). The Pareto principle. British Dental Journal, 201(7), 419. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4814131
Feng, G. C. (2020). Research performance evaluation in China: A big data analysis. SAGE Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019901257
Fortunato, S. (2010). Community detection in graphs. Physics Reports, 486(3–5), 75–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2009.11.002
Gök, A., Rigby, J., & Shapira, P. (2016). The impact of research funding on scientific outputs: Evidence from six smaller European countries. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(3), 715–730. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23406
Gyorffy, B., Herman, P. É., & Szabó, I. (2020). Research funding: past performance is a stronger predictor of future scientific output than reviewer scores. Journal of Informetrics, 14(3), 101050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2020.101050
Hagberg, A., Schult, D., & Swart, P. (2011). NetworkX Reference (Python) (p. 464). Python Package.
Huang, M. H., & Huang, M. J. (2018). An analysis of global research funding from subject field and funding agencies perspectives in the G9 countries. Scientometrics, 115(2), 833–847. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2677-y
Jacob, B. A., & Lefgren, L. (2011). The impact of research grant funding on scientific productivity. Journal of Public Economics, 95(9–10), 1168–1177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2011.05.005
Li, W., Aste, T., Caccioli, F., & Livan, G. (2019). Achieving competitive advantage in academia through early career coauthorship with top scientists. Nature Communication, 2019, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-13130-4
Liang, X., & Liu, A. M. M. (2018). The evolution of government sponsored collaboration network and its impact on innovation: A bibliometric analysis in the Chinese solar PV sector. Research Policy, 47(7), 1295–1308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.04.012
Mehmood, Y., Barbieri, N., Bonchi, F., & Ukkonen, A. (2013). CSI: Community-level social influence analysis. In Camille Salinesi, Moira C. Norrie, & Óscar. Pastor (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) 8189 LNAI(PART 2) (pp. 48–63). Springer.
Ministry of Science and Technology. (2014). Annual Report of Program, 973.
Newman, M. E. J. (2001). Scientific collaboration networks. I. Network construction and fundamental results. Physical Review E-Statistical Physics, Plasmas, Fluids, and Related Interdisciplinary Topics, 64(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.64.016131
Newman, M. E. J. (2001). Scientific collaboration networks. II. Shortest paths, weighted networks, and centrality. Physical Review E-Statistical Physics, Plasmas, Fluids, and Related Interdisciplinary Topics, 64(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.64.016132
Nguyen, M. Van., Kirley, M., & García-Flores, R. (2012). Community evolution in a scientific collaboration network. IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation. https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC.2012.6256434
NSF. (2013). FY 2012 Performance and Financial Highlights From the Director Following the Money.
NSF. (2020). About the National Science Foundation. http://www.nsf.gov/about/
NSFC. (2019). Performance Report of NSFC.
Palla, G., Barabási, A. L., & Vicsek, T. (2007). Quantifying social group evolution. Nature, 446(7136), 664–667. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05670
Palla, G., Derényi, I., Farkas, I., & Vicsek, T. (2005). Uncovering the overlapping community structure of complex networks in nature and society. Nature, 435(7043), 814–818. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03607
Protogerou, A., Caloghirou, Y., & Siokas, E. (2013). Twenty-five years of science-industry collaboration: The emergence and evolution of policy-driven research networks across Europe. Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(6), 873–895. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-012-9278-3
Rossetti, G., & Cazabet, R. (2018). Community discovery in dynamic networks: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys. https://doi.org/10.1145/3172867
Rosvall, M., & Bergstrom, C. T. (2010). Mapping Change in Large Networks. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0008694
Sotiropoulos, D. N., Pournarakis, D. E., & Giaglis, G. M. (2016). Tracking the evolution of communities in co-authorship networks: A semantically aware approach. IISA 2015-6th International Conference on Information Intelligence Systems and Applications. https://doi.org/10.1109/IISA.2015.7388044
Takaffoli, M., Sangi, F., Fagnan, J., & Zaïiane, O. R. (2011). Community evolution mining in dynamic social networks. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 22, 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.07.055
Toyoda, M., & Kitsuregawa, M. (2003). Extracting evolution of web communities from a series of web archives. Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Hypertext, 14, 28–37. https://doi.org/10.1145/900051.900059
Wang, Y., Luo, H., & Li, Z. (2019). Network of global top scientific talent migration based on system identification. Systems Engineering - Theory & Practice, 39(10), 2590–2598. https://doi.org/10.12011/1000-6788-2018-0436-09
Web of Science All Databases Help. (2020). http://images.webofknowledge.com//WOKRS535R100/help/WOK/hs_research_domains.html#dsy5468-TRS_physical_sciences
Yan, E., Wu, C., & Song, M. (2007). The funding factor: A cross-disciplinary examination of the association between funding and citation impact. 1–19.
Zhao, S. X., Lou, W., Tan, A. M., & Yu, S. (2018). Do funded papers attract more usage? Scientometrics, 115(1), 153–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2662-5
Zheng, J., Gong, J., Li, R., Hu, K., Wu, H., & Yang, S. (2017). Community evolution analysis based on co-author network: A case study of academic communities of the journal of “Annals of the Association of American Geographers.” Scientometrics, 113(2), 845–865. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2515-7
Acknowledgements
This study is supported by“Safety Risk Assessment Method of Consumer Products” of the National Key Research and Development Project (2017YFF0209604-2).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dong, J., Liu, J. & Liu, T. The impact of top scientists on the community development of basic research directed by government funding: evidence from program 973 in China. Scientometrics 126, 8561–8579 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04092-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04092-w