Partnership ability and co-authorship network of information literacy field

被引:8
|
作者
Baji, Fatima [1 ]
Mostafavi, Ismail [1 ]
Parsaei-Mohammadi, Parastoo [1 ]
Sabaghinejad, Zivar [1 ]
机构
[1] Ahvaz Jundishapur Univ Med Sci, Sch Allied Med Sci, Dept Med Lib & Informat Sci, Ahvaz, Iran
关键词
Co-authorship; Social network analysis (SNA); Partnership ability; phi-index information literacy; COLLABORATION; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1007/s11192-021-04062-2
中图分类号
TP39 [计算机的应用];
学科分类号
081203 ; 0835 ;
摘要
Scientific collaboration or co-authorship has different forms and can be a factor in creating knowledge and even increasing the quality of scientific works. Beyond the quantity, qualitative factors also affect scientific collaboration. Two factors Collaboration intensity and member diversity can predict research quality, so teams with constant or diverse collaborators could affect co-authorship network's quality. Current study used scientometrics methods including SNA. Research data were "information literacy" related documents indexed in Scopus database, during years 1941-2019. Scopus.exe, UCINET 6 and NetDraw were used for analyzing data. Results show that phi-index has a negative relationship with number of co-authors, degree and ties. This means that the higher number of co-authors, degree and ties the lower phi-index, which is confirms phi-index meaning. Centrality betweenness has a positive relationship with the number of articles, co-authors and ties which means that betweenness of authors goes high if the author has more articles, co-authors and ties. Also, degree centrality has a significant positive relationship with the number of articles, betweenness, and ties. Findings related to correlations show that phi-index is a measure based on the number of articles and fixed teams of scientific collaboration while the centrality measures such as degree and betweenness are based on the number of articles, diversity in co-authors. This seems to be in contrast with the phi-index concept.
引用
收藏
页码:8205 / 8216
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Co-authorship Network Analysis in the Accounting Discipline
    Kilic, Merve
    Uyar, Ali
    Koseoglu, Mehmet Ali
    AUSTRALIAN ACCOUNTING REVIEW, 2019, 29 (01) : 235 - 251
  • [22] Weighted Co-authorship Network Based on Forgetting
    Kudelka, Milos
    Horak, Alenek
    Snasel, Vaclav
    Abraham, Ajith
    FUTURE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, PT II, 2011, 185 : 72 - 79
  • [23] Co-authorship network analysis of Mexican bibliometrics
    Alvarado, Ruben Urbizagastegui
    Restrepo Arango, Cristina
    ENCONTROS BIBLI-REVISTA ELETRONICA DE BIBLIOTECONOMIA E CIENCIA DA INFORMACAO, 2018, 23 (51): : 74 - 94
  • [24] Co-authorship as an indicator of scientific collaboration network
    Maia, Maria de Fatima S.
    Caregnato, Sonia Elisa
    PERSPECTIVAS EM CIENCIA DA INFORMACAO, 2008, 13 (02): : 18 - 31
  • [25] Social and swarm aspects of co-authorship network
    Kudelka, Milos
    Horak, Zdenek
    Snasel, Vaclav
    Kroemer, Pavel
    Platos, Jan
    Abraham, Ajith
    LOGIC JOURNAL OF THE IGPL, 2012, 20 (03) : 634 - 643
  • [26] Co-authorship network and the correlation with academic performance
    Xu, Qianwen Ariel
    Chang, Victor
    INTERNET OF THINGS, 2020, 12
  • [27] Written by Several Hands: Revisiting Authorship and Co-authorship in the Field of History
    de Sousa, Marcos Eduardo
    REVISTA BRASILEIRA DE HISTORIA, 2020, 40 (83): : 7 - 12
  • [28] Analysis of Japanese information systems co-authorship data
    LaRowe, Gavin
    Ichise, Ryutaro
    Boerner, Katy
    11TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE INFORMATION VISUALIZATION, 2007, : 459 - +
  • [29] PITFALLS OF CO-AUTHORSHIP
    不详
    NATURE, 1994, 372 (6505) : 390 - 390
  • [30] CO-AUTHORSHIP AND PRODUCTIVITY
    PAO, ML
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, 1980, 17 : 279 - 281