Skip to main content
Log in

Academic Collaboration Recommendation for Computer Science Researchers Using Social Network Analysis

  • Published:
Wireless Personal Communications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In order to improve the quality and quantity of the performance in computing in Nigeria Universities, there is need for a functioning research networking application through which they can exchange ideas. This is because academics tend to be more comfortable communicating with each other, asking questions and more importantly, such networking will provide mentorship in the Nigeria academic community. In order to make for this, several recommendations have been suggested but not scientific. Therefore to bridge this gap, this paper examines the properties of co-authorship network in Covenant University, Computer Science department. Properties of network such as centrality measures, network coefficient and so on are discovered. A collaboration recommendation application is then developed using the link prediction based on the Adamic-Adar Index measure. In conclusion, the result gotten from the network analysis is a valuable source of information for accessing the different centrality values of researchers in computer science. It also formed the foundation for developing an academic collaboration recommendation system for a small world research network. This will therefore improve the quantity and quality of performance of computer science academics in Nigeria.

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
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The data used for the research is available on request.

Code Availability

The code for analysing the data is available on request.

References

  1. Mattessich, P. M. C. (2001). Collaboration: What makes it work (2nd ed.). Amherst H.Wilder Foundation.

  2. Lewis, J. (2010). Connecting and cooperating: Social capital and public policy. UNSW Press.

  3. Okokpujie, I., Fayomi, O., Ogbonnaya, S., & Fayomi, G. (2018). The wide margin between the academic and researcher in new age university for sustainable development. Energy Procedia, 157, 862–870.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Theresa, C. O., & Samson, O. C. (2017). Career-training mentorship intervention via the Dreyfus model: Implification for career behaviors and practical skills acquisition in vocational electronic technology. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 103, 88–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ductor, L. (2014). Does co-authorship lead to higher academic productivity? Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 77(3), 385–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kima, Y., Choib, T. Y., Yanb, T., & Dooley, K. (2011). Structural investigation of supply networks: A social network analysis approach. Journal of Operations Management, 29, 194–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Borgatti, S. P., & Li, X. (2009). On social network analysis in a supply chain context. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 45(2), 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. France, C., & Brian, J. C. (2009). A social network analysis of the co-authorship network of the pacific asia conference on information systems from 1993 to 2008. In Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (pp. 1–13).

  10. Bruce Hoppe and Claire Reinelt. (2010). Social network analysis and the evaluation of leadership networks. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 600–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Michael, F., & Martina, K. M. (2010). The impact of network structure on knowledge transfer: an application of social network analysis in the context of regional innovation networks. The Annals of Regional Science, 44(1), 21–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Manh, C. P., Yiwei, C., Ralf, K., & Matthias, J. (2011). A clustering approach for collaborative filtering recommendation using social network analysis. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 17(4), 583–604.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Alireza, A., Jorn, A., & Liaquat, H. (2011). Identifying the effects of co-authorship networks on the performance of scholars: A correlation and regression analysis of performance measures and social network analysis measures. Journal of Informetrics, 3, 594–607.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Tasleem, A., Rashid, A., & Asger, M. (2012). Scientific co-athorship social networks: A case study of computer science scenario in India. International Journal of Computer Applications, 52(12), 38–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Li, E. Y., Liao, C. H., & Yen, H. R. (2013). Co-authorship networks and research impact: A social capital perspective. Research Policy, 42(9), 1515–1530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Tahereh, D., & Stefano, N. (2017). Research impact in co-authorship networks: a two-mode analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11, 371–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Marion, E. H. (2017). Sport commmunication research: A social network analysis. Sport Management Review, 20, 170–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Jingfeng, Y., Kaiwen, C., Wei, L., Chuang, J., & Zhiru, W. (2018). Social network analysis for social risks of construction projects in high-density urban areas in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 198, 940–961.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Yang, R. J., & Zou, P. (2014). Stakeholder associated risks and their interactions in complex green building projects: A social network model. Building of Environment, 73, 208–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Jose, L. O. (2014). Influence of co-authorship networks in the research impact: Ego network analyses from microsoft academic search. Journal of Informetrics, 8, 728–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. William, R. (2006). Definitions of community. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg, School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University.

  22. Matthew, D. (2014). Social network analysis. Institute for Social Science Research, 1–20.

  23. Zachary, W. W. (1977). An information flow model for conflict and fission in small groups. Journal of Anthropological Research, 33(4), 452–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Bonacich, P. (1972). Factoring and weighting approaches to status scores and clique identification. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 2(1), 113–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Fei, G., Katarzyna, M., Colin, C., & Sophia, T. (2015). Link prediction methods and their accuracy for different social networks and network metrics. Scientific Programming. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/172879

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors appreciate Covenant University for sponsoring the publication of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Oluwole A. Odetunmibi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

There is no conflict of interest that is known to the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Afolabi, I.T., Ayo, A. & Odetunmibi, O.A. Academic Collaboration Recommendation for Computer Science Researchers Using Social Network Analysis. Wireless Pers Commun 121, 487–501 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-021-08646-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-021-08646-2

Keywords

Navigation