2011
DOI: 10.1057/hep.2011.9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Power and Networks in Worldwide Knowledge Coordination: The Case of Global Science

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
16
0
4

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
1
16
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…In that sense, we have to limit the scope of interpretation to the fact that, within these journals, the topics discussed do not vary much. Nevertheless, this result is inline with many other studies in the field on the unequal distribution of citations, at least in international journals (Bonitz et al 1997;Demeter and Toth 2020;King 2011;Merton 1974).…”
Section: Country-level Analysissupporting
confidence: 88%
“…In that sense, we have to limit the scope of interpretation to the fact that, within these journals, the topics discussed do not vary much. Nevertheless, this result is inline with many other studies in the field on the unequal distribution of citations, at least in international journals (Bonitz et al 1997;Demeter and Toth 2020;King 2011;Merton 1974).…”
Section: Country-level Analysissupporting
confidence: 88%
“…King (2011) downplays the role of governments in facilitating international cooperation among scientists, instead allocating the primary role to the individual curiosity and career desires of scientists in a self-organising network of global science that is increasingly immune to government interference. According to King (2011, p. 371), '[t]he recent movement to globally based, networked science is controlled effectively by researchers rather than by governments'.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, the growth of international trade (Ben-David, 1971) and the emergence of multinational firms in such science-based industries as pharmaceuticals and biotechnology (Peters, 2006) have also supported the expansion of international research collaboration. Finally, revolutionary advances in information and communications technology (Gibbons et al, 1994;King, 2011;Kouzes, Myers, & Wulf, 1996) and a decreasing cost of international travel (Williams & Losier, 2009) have eased mobility and interaction between scientists.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Global science is commonly understood as deeply hierarchical: a few "core" countries in the "global north" dominate the norms and institutions that guide research activity, 1 University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada produce most research that is recognized internationally, and exert a strong influence over the direction of academic disciplines (Collyer, 2018;King, 2011;Peters, 2006). Most other countries, particularly those in the "global South," are commonly viewed as occupying a peripheral position in this global system, as their domestic research problems and objectives are not perceived as scientifically relevant or interesting to the international community.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%