When researchers are to write a new article, they often seek co-authors who are knowledgeable on the article’s subject. However, they also strive for acceptance of their article. Based on this otherwise intuitive process, the current article presents the COCOON CORE tool that recommends candidate co-authors based on like-mindedness and power. Like-mindedness ensures that co-authors share a common ground, which is necessary for seamless cooperation. Powerful co-authors foster adoption of an article’s research idea by the community. Two experiments were conducted, one focusing on the perceived quality of the recommendations that COCOON CORE generates and one focusing on the usability of COCOON CORE. Results indicate that participants perceive the recommendations moderately positively. Particularly, they value the recommendations that focus fully on finding influential peers and the recommendation in which they themselves can adjust the balance between finding influential peers and like-minded peers. Also, the usability of COCOON CORE is perceived to be moderately good.
Social network analysis Science 2.0 Co-authorship Research network Informetrics Recommender systems Scientometrics
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
The authors thank Dr. Lora Aroyo from the VU University Amsterdam for her insightful comments during the design and implementation phases of COCOON CORE.
Gardner WL, Lowe KB, Moss TW, Mahoney KT, Cogliser CC (2011) Scholarly leadership of the study of leadership: a review of The Leadership Quarterly’s second decade, 2000–2009. Leadersh Q 21(6):922–958. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.10.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotter JP (1996) Leading change. Harvard Business, p 208Google Scholar
Abbasi A, Altmann J, Hossain L (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. J Informetr 5(4):594–607. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2011.05.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sie RLL, Drachsler H, Bitter-Rijpkema M, Sloep PB (2012) To whom and why should i connect? Co-author recommendation based on powerful and similar peers. IJTEL 1(2):121–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooke, J. (1996). SUS: a “quick and dirty” usability scale. In P. W. Jordan, B. Thomas, B. A. Weerdmeester, & A. L. McClelland. Usability Evaluation in Industry. London: Taylor and FrancisGoogle Scholar
Brandes U (1994) A faster algorithm for betweenness centrality. J Math Sociol 25:163–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman LC (1977) A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness. Sociometry 40(1):35–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ibarra H (1992) Homophily and differential returns: sex differences in network structure and access in an advertising firm. Science 37(3):422–447Google Scholar