Advertisement

Higher Education Policy

, Volume 31, Issue 4, pp 559–581 | Cite as

Unit Support, Past Experience and Researcher Attitude for Intra-institutional Research Collaboration: Survey Study in a US Doctoral/Research University

  • Michail TsikerdekisEmail author
  • Ning Yu
Original Article

Intra-institutional collaboration is an often neglected type of research collaboration from the literature. This study aimed to understand what factors contribute to this type of collaboration as well as what types of factors can impact negatively the likelihood of this collaboration. We deployed a survey in a US research institution and measured for factors relating to environmental, past researcher behavior and personal research characteristics. We developed a model that demonstrates how these sets variables influence intra-institutional collaboration and developed recommendations for units. Unit support for collaboration and past behavior were found to impact intra-institutional collaboration. Additionally, researcher’s attitudes toward sharing knowledge and resources were also found to impact the likelihood for collaboration within institution.

Keywords

research collaboration academic university support experience 

References

  1. Adams, J. (2013) ‘Collaborations: The fourth age of research’, Nature 497(7451): 557–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. (1984) The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis, Psychometrika 49(2): 155–173. doi:  10.1007/BF02294170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anholt, R.M., Stephen, C. and Copes, R. (2012) ‘Strategies for Collaboration in the Interdisciplinary Field of Emerging Zoonotic Diseases’, Zoonoses and Public Health 59(4): 229–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beaver, D. and Rosen, R. (1978) ‘Studies in scientific collaboration Part I. The professional origins of scientific co-authorship’, Scientometrics 1(1): 65–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beaver, D. and Rosen, R. (1979) ‘Studies in scientific collaboration Part III. Professionalization and the natural history of modern scientific co-authorship’, Scientometrics 1(3): 231–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bentler, P.M. (1980) ‘Multivariate Analysis with Latent Variables: Causal Modeling’, Annual Review of Psychology 31(no issue number): 419–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Birnholtz, J., Guha, S., Yuan, Y.C., Gay, G. and Heller, C. (2013) ‘Cross-campus collaboration: a scientometric and network case study of publication activity across two campuses of a single institution’, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64(1): 162–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boix Mansilla, V., Lamont, M. and Sato, K. (2015) ‘Shared Cognitive–Emotional–Interactional Platforms’, Science, Technology, and Human Values 41(4): 571–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bozeman, B. and Corley, E. (2004) ‘Scientists’ collaboration strategies: implications for scientific and technical human capital’, Research Policy 33(4): 599–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown, T.A. (2015) Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research, New York, The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  11. Bukvova, H. (2010) ‘Studying Research Collaboration: A Literature Review’, Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems 10(3). Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/200629645_Studying_Research_Collaboration_A_Literature_Review.
  12. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (2011) The Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, 2010 edition, Menlo Park, CA: Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education.Google Scholar
  13. Carroll, J.M., Rosson, M.B., Farooq, U. and Xiao, L. (2009) ‘Beyond being aware’, Information and Organization 19(3): 162–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Benavent-Pérez, M., de Moya-Anegón, F. and Miguel, S. (2012) ‘International collaboration in Medical Research in Latin America and the Caribbean (2003–2007)’, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 63(11): 2223–2238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Choi, S., Yang, J.S. and Park, H.W. (2015) ‘The triple helix and international collaboration in science’, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 66(1):201–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chung, E., Kwon, N. and Lee, J. (2015) ‘Understanding scientific collaboration in the research life cycle: Bio- and nanoscientists’ motivations, information-sharing and communication practices, and barriers to collaboration’, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. Published online 5 May 2015. doi.org/ 10.1002/asi.23520.
  17. Cummings, J.N. and Kiesler, S. (2007) ‘Coordination costs and project outcomes in multi-university collaborations’, Research Policy 36(10): 1620–1634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Davidson Frame, J. and Carpenter, M.P. (1979) ‘International Research Collaboration’, Social Studies of Science 9(4): 481–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. De Solla Price, D. (1986) Little Science, Big Science…and Beyond, New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  20. De Solla Price, D.J. and Beaver, D. (1966) ‘Collaboration is an invisible college’, American Psychologist 21(11): 1011–1018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dovidio, J.F., Saguy, T. and Shnabel, N. (2009) ‘Cooperation and Conflict within Groups: Bridging Intragroup and Intergroup Processes’ Journal of Social Issues 65(2): 429–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Edge, D. (1979) ‘Quantitative measures of communication in science: A critical review’, History of Science 17(2): 102–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Finney, S.J. and DiStefano, C. (2006) ‘Non-normal and categorical data in structured equation modeling’, in G.R. Hancock and R.O. Mueller (eds.) Structural Equation Modeling: A Second Course, Charlotte, NC: IAP, pp. 269–297.Google Scholar
  24. Fox, M.F. and Faver, C.A. (1984) ‘Independence and cooperation in research: the motivations and costs of collaboration’ The Journal of Higher Education 55(3): 347–359.Google Scholar
  25. Franceschet, M. (2011) ‘Collaboration in computer science: a network science approach’ Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 62(10): 1992–2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gazni, A., Sugimoto, C.R. and Didegah, F. (2012) ‘Mapping world scientific collaboration: authors, institutions, and countries’, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 63(2): 323–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gordon, M. (1980) ‘A critical reassessment of inferred relations between multiple authorship, scientific collaboration, the production of papers and their acceptance for publication’, Scientometrics 2(3): 193–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hagstrom, W.O. (1965) The Scientific Community, New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  29. Harris, P.A., Taylor, R., Thielke, R., Payne, J., Gonzalez, N. and Conde, J.G. (2009) ‘Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support’, Journal of Biomedical Informatics 42(2): 377–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Heffner, A. (1981) ‘Funded research, multiple authorship, and subauthorship collaboration in four disciplines’, Scientometrics 3(1): 5–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Huang, M.-H., Wu, L.-L. and Wu, Y.-C. (2015) ‘A study of research collaboration in the pre-web and post-web stages: a coauthorship analysis of the information systems discipline’, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 66(4): 778–797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Katerndahl, D.A. (1996) ‘Associations between departmental features and departmental scholarly activity’, Family Medicine 28(2): 119–127.Google Scholar
  33. Katz, J.S. (1993) Bibliometic assessment of intranational university-university collaboration. PhD thesis, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.Google Scholar
  34. Katz, J.S. and Martin, B.R. (1997) ‘What is research collaboration?’, Research Policy 26(1): 1-18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kraut, R., Egido, C. and Galegher, J. (1988) Patterns of Contact and Communication in Scientific Research Collaboration, in Proceedings of the 1988 ACM Conference on Computer-supported Cooperative Work, 26–28 September 1988, Portland, Oregon. New York: ACM, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
  36. Landis, J.R. and Koch, G.G. (1977) ‘The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data’, Biometrics 33(1): 159–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lee, S. and Bozeman, B. (2005) ‘The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity’, Social Studies of Science 35(5): 673–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lewis, J., Ross, S. and Holden, T. (2012) ‘The how and why of academic collaboration: disciplinary differences and policy implications’, Higher Education 64(5): 693–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lewis, J.M. (2013) Academic Governance: Disciplines and Policy, New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. MacCallum, R.C., Browne, M.W. and Sugawara, H.M. (1996) ‘Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling’, Psychological Methods 1(2): 130–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Meadows, A.J. (1974) Communication in Science, London: Butterworths.Google Scholar
  42. Meadows, A.J. and O’Connor, J.G. (1971) ‘Bibliographic statistics as a guide to growth points in science’, Science Studies 1(1): 95–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pao, M.L. (1992) ‘Global and local collaborators: A study of scientific collaboration’, Information Processing and Management 28(1): 99–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Papatsiba, V. (2013) ‘The idea of collaboration in the academy: its epistemic and social potentials and risks for knowledge generation’, Policy Futures in Education 11(4): 436–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Persson, O., Glänzel, W. and Danell, R. (2004) ‘Inflationary bibliometric values: the role of scientific collaboration and the need for relative indicators in evaluative studies’, Scientometrics 60(3): 421–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Rosseel, Y. (2012) ‘lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling’, Journal of Statistical Software 48(2), published online 24/05/2012. doi: 10.18637/jss.v048.i02.Google Scholar
  47. Seonghee, K. and Boryung, J. (2008) ‘An analysis of faculty perceptions: attitudes toward knowledge sharing and collaboration in an academic institution’, Library and Information Science Research 30(4): 282–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sheehan, K.B. (2001) ‘E-mail Survey Response Rates: A Review’, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 6(2), published online 01/01/2001. doi:  10.1111/j.1083-6101.2001.tb00117.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Smith, D. and Katz, J.S. (2000). Collaborative Approaches to Research. HEFCE Fundamental Review of Research Policy and Funding, Final Report. Higher Education Policy Unit (HEPU), University of Leeds and the Science Policy Research Unit (SPRU) University of Sussex. Available on http://users.sussex.ac.uk/~sylvank/pubs/collc.pdf.
  51. Stokols, D., Misra, S., Moser, R.P., Hall, K.L. and Taylor, B.K. (2008) ‘The ecology of team science’, American Journal of Preventive Medicine 35(2): S96–S115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Subramanyam, K. (1983) ‘Bibliometric studies of research collaboration: a review’, Journal of Information Science 6(1): 33–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sud, P. and Thelwall, M. (2015) 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. doi:  10.1002/asi.23515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wright, J.D. and Marsden, P.V. (2010) ‘Survey research and social science: history, current practice, and future prospects’, in J.D. Wright and P.V. Marsden (eds.) Handbook of Survey Research, Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing, pp. 3–26.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Association of Universities 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentWestern Washington UniversityBellinghamUSA
  2. 2.LeidosArlingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations