A Social Network Analysis of International Collaboration in Counseling Psychology

Abstract

Over the past two decades, counseling psychology has emerged as an international discipline. Despite efforts to internationalize counseling psychology and increase cross-cultural relationships, few studies have considered international collaboration on scientific scholarship as a metric or factor of internationalization. Therefore, using social network analyses, we tested the occurrence and patterns of collaborations between authors from different countries on published studies in the Journal of Counseling Psychology and The Counseling Psychologist from 2005 to 2015. Results indicated that a small proportion of possible international collaborations existed, as measured by network density, and the majority of collaborations involved authors affiliated with institutions in the United States. However, international collaboration significantly increased over time, as measured by the density of the network. Our findings are consistent with previous research suggesting a lack of cross-national scholarship in counseling psychology and identify global areas for further cross-cultural development.

Working Globally: Advancing International Competencies in Counseling Psychology

“…Taken together, the articles in this Major Contribution present the results of a major international collaboration. Although there is always a chance in such collaborations that the voices of Western researchers are the most dominant (Adair, Coêlho, & Luna, 2002;Kivlighan III, Adams, Deng, Ye, & Menninga, 2018;van de Vijer, 2013), our teams tried to be vigilant of this tendency by focusing on sharing power, listening, and learning from each other-engaging in international competency skills consistent with the CNCC model (Heppner et al, 2012). We hope that the articles that follow, which highlight the competencies needed to work thoughtfully and effectively in an international context, will also inspire readers to gain significant knowledge through international collaborations.…”

Analysis of the Evolution of User Emotion and Opinion Leaders’ Information Dissemination Behavior in the Knowledge Q&A Community during COVID-19

“…Density: the proportion of possible relationships in the network. The value ranges from 0 to 1 [63]. When n is the number of individuals in the network, and l is the number of lines that exist between users, it is expressed as:…”

“…As shown in 2, in the opinion leader information exchange network, certain individuals (4, 14, 54, 79, 110, 140, 166, 186) have a larger in-degree and are therefore good at receiv formation from other users. Some individuals (27,35,54,58,63,117,139,140,14…”

“…As shown in Table 2, in the opinion leader information exchange network, certain individuals (4, 14, 40, 44, 54, 79, 110, 140, 166, 186) have a larger in-degree and are therefore good at receiving information from other users. Some individuals (27,35,54,58,63,117,139,140,147,169,173,174,187) have a larger out-degree, which means they are willing to actively discuss topics with other individuals and are good at expressing their opinions. Meanwhile, Freeman's betweenness measures the degree of control of resources by actors.…”

“…Meanwhile, Freeman's betweenness measures the degree of control of resources by actors. Those individuals (14,27,29,35,39,54,58,63,110,117,140,147,152,166,169,173,187) with larger Freeman's betweenness are the middlemen of the network; they have high social proficiency within the topic community and influence the dissemination of information and knowledge. Many individuals in the network need these "social influencers" to connect with other individuals.…”