Examining the relationship of co-authorship network centrality and gender on academic research performance: the case of chemistry researchers in Pakistan

Badar, Kamal; Hite, Julie M.; Badir, Yuosre F.

doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0764-z

Cited by 95 publications

(82 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There is not, however, a consensus on the exact importance of each of these measures. They can be related to a greater amount of productivity (Yan and Ding 2009;Badar et al 2013), or could be evidence that they are ''links of preference'' when incorporating new authors (Abbasi et al 2012). These factors could serve to advance the development of the co-authorship network, as two authors not linked, but with contacts in common, may collaborate in the future, although it is unlikely that those with a large number of intermediaries would do so.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping recent information behavior research: an analysis of co-authorship and co-citation networks

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There has been an increase in research published on information behavior in recent years, and this has been accompanied by an increase in its diversity and interaction with other fields, particularly information retrieval. The aims of this study are to determine which researchers have contributed to producing the current body of knowledge on this subject, and to describe its intellectual basis. A bibliometric and network analysis was applied to authorship and co-authorship as well as citation and co-citation. According to these analyses, there is a small number of authors who can be considered to be the most productive and who publish regularly, and a large number of transient ones. Other findings reveal a marked predominance of theoretical works, some examples of qualitative methodology that originate in other areas of social science, and a high incidence of research focused on the user interaction with information retrieval systems and the information behavior of doctors.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping recent information behavior research: an analysis of co-authorship and co-citation networks

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, co-authorship networks can also be termed as knowledge networks (Oh et al 2005). The authors embedded in these knowledge networks can benefit from the knowledge flowing within the network by acquiring structurally advantageous positions in the network (Badar et al 2013(Badar et al , 2014 to derive favorable outcomes such as enhanced research performance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A central actor in a coauthorship network can benefit from the knowledge flowing within the network to derive enhanced research performance outcomes. Thinking on these lines, prior research has investigated and identified the positive influence of centrality on research performance outcomes in co-authorship networks (Abbasi et al 2011;Badar et al 2013Badar et al , 2014Eaton et al 1999;Fischbach et al 2011;Lee et al 2012;Liao 2011); yet leaving some important research questions largely un-answered. First, is the relationship between network centrality and research performance strictly linear or curvilinear (inverted U-shaped)?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Emerging empirical advancements have shown the value of examining the characteristics of individuals together with the social network structures in which they are embedded (Badar et al 2013(Badar et al , 2014Bhardwaj et al 2008;Burt 1998;Lee and Bozeman 2005;Zhou et al 2009). We contribute to these advancements by theorizing that an individual characteristic, formal rank, will moderate the curvilinear relationship between centrality and research performance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Knowledge network centrality, formal rank and research performance: evidence for curvilinear and interaction effects

2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explores the curvilinear (inverted U-shaped) association of three classical dimension of co-authorship network centrality, degree, closeness and betweenness and the research performance in terms of g-index, of authors embedded in a coauthorship network, considering formal rank of the authors as a moderator between network centrality and research performance. We use publication data from ISI Web of Science (from years 2002-2009), citation data using Publish or Perish software for years 2010-2013 and CV's of faculty members. Using social network analysis techniques and Poisson regression, we explore our research questions in a domestic co-authorship network of 203 faculty members publishing in Chemistry and it's sub-fields within a developing country, Pakistan. Our results reveal the curvilinear (inverted U-shaped) association of direct and distant co-authorship ties (degree centrality) with research performance with formal rank having a positive moderating role for lower ranked faculty.

show abstract

“…It has been demonstrated that research collaborations have a positive correlation with scientific performance 26 and particularly international collaborations 27 , but also that women register less international collaborations than men 28 , possibly for reasons of women avoiding longer stays away from their families. Women tend to have more restricted collaboration networks [29][30][31] , particularly in the first few years of their career 32,33 , which limits their access to the resources and assets necessary for their research activity. Duch et al 34 observe that academic research institutions tend not to support women with adequate financial resources, particularly in the hard sciences.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Accounting for Gender Research Performance Differences in Ranking Universities

Abramo

D’Angelo

2015

Current Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Keywords: Bibliometrics, gender differences, ranking universities, research productivity.THE representation of women in research varies across countries, institutions and disciplines. However, the fact of their underrepresentation is undeniable. Only four (Portugal, Estonia, Slovak Republic and Iceland) of the 28 OECD nations whose data are available show representation of women greater than 40%, with a maximum of 46% (ref. 1). This phenomenon is underlain by a mix of different factors, with different weights across countries: educational emancipation has come later for women, with consequent lesser numbers of potential candidates for academic positions; lesser interest among women for research activity; the scientific production of women tends to be lower than that for men, perhaps due to the social roles of women as wives and mothers, or from causes of gender discrimination; gender discrimination can also occur in recruitment processes. One way to reduce the underrepresentation of women in research is to control for the factors exogenous to scientific merit in all processes of comparative performance evaluation at the individual and institutional levels. By doing so one can avoid incorrect conclusions and choices that are harmful to women and to those institutions with greater female representation in their research staff. In this regard it is important to note that the so-called 'productivity gap' in favour of men is a documented fact. The lower research performance of women has been established in several studies from diverse countries and disciplines 2-6 , although it is decreasing over time [7][8][9][10][11][12] , and it is more visible in the early stages of career 13 and among top scientists 14,15 . Looking at productivity as indicated by patenting, women faculty members contribute about 40% compared to men 16 . There is equally substantial literature investigating the possible causes of the productivity gap, particularly the issues of the environmental and personal factors that can influence the performance of a researcher, beyond the personal merit of the individual 17 . Rossiter 18 indicates the particular case of the so called 'Matilda effect', which occurs when female scientists are not recognized in the bylines of the publications resulting from joint research. A separate concern is that in the career recruitment stages, the percentage of women applicants who are successful in selection procedures is generally low 19 . In the subsequent stages of entry to the academic environment, females generally evaluate their mentors as less satisfactory than do their male colleagues 20 . However, there is also no doubt that the changing personal conditions that the researchers experience over time also affect their productivity. In the late postdoctoral and early faculty years, many qualified women scientists stop applying for NIH grants 21 . During their careers, women present lower productivity in the intermediate levels of seniority 22 . In this phase, marriage and school-going children have negative effect...

show abstract

Examining the relationship of co-authorship network centrality and gender on academic research performance: the case of chemistry researchers in Pakistan

Cited by 95 publications

References 56 publications

Mapping recent information behavior research: an analysis of co-authorship and co-citation networks

Mapping recent information behavior research: an analysis of co-authorship and co-citation networks

Knowledge network centrality, formal rank and research performance: evidence for curvilinear and interaction effects

Accounting for Gender Research Performance Differences in Ranking Universities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About