Detecting Research Groups in Coauthorship Networks

Perianes-Rodríguez, Antonio and Olmeda-Gómez, Carlos and De-Moya-Anegón, Félix Detecting Research Groups in Coauthorship Networks., 2008 . In Fourth International Conference on Webometrics, Informetrics and Scientometrics & Ninth COLLNET Meeting, Berlin (Germany), 28 July - 1 August 2008. [Conference paper]


Download (776kB) | Preview

English abstract

From the perspective of Library Science and Information Science, little research has yet been conducted on scientific networking and its possible uses in ascertaining the composition of research groups, the differences in associations between specialities or departments, and the different policies that may be followed in this regard, depending on the institution or the domain analyzed. Traditionally, most studies on scientific collaboration have been geared to analyzing output, be it international or domestic, of a given scientific discipline or a research institution. Studies on smaller units such as departments or research groups are less common. This work focuses on a specific facet of scientific communication networks, namely scientific co-authorship networks, based on the premise that scientific communication is the essence of research, and research is only known as such when it has been analyzed and accepted by the scientific community, which gives it the status of a social activity. The use of the term “scientific communication”, therefore, means deliberately limiting considerations on communication to a specific group of individuals (authors directly involved in the creation of original research work): those engaging in a well-defined activity and having very specific objectives. The main objective of this work is to identify, characterize and interpret research groups in Carlos III University of Madrid using empirical analysis, through the examination and visualization of scientific networking based on co-authorship papers. The findings obtained will contribute to a better understanding of network dynamics and of how they affect network topology and the internal structure of links among such research groups, and by extension, how they affect the higher-level administrative units of which they form a part. To this end, this work will try to achieve two specific objectives: on one hand, to model and characterize co-authorship networks by calculating indicators of the properties of nodes and links that describe sizes and neighbourhoods in subgraphs, as well as to obtain comprehensive measurements that statistically characterize the structure of network interconnections as a whole. On the other hand, to create specialized network-based visualizations, including diagrams of nodes and links, that can be used as interfaces to retrieve information. These interfaces provide data on the element matrices and on the values of their attributes in a clear, easily understood, explanatory and interactive way. They facilitate an understanding of the structural context represented, transmitting detailed information to the user about a variety of aspects relating to scientific collaboration and its evolution over time, such as administrative position, gender, speciality areas of research and the internal and external association patterns among authors.

Item type: Conference paper
Keywords: Scientific Collaboration, Research Groups, Coauthorship, Network Analysis, Information Visualization
Subjects: B. Information use and sociology of information > BB. Bibliometric methods
Depositing user: Antonio Perianes-Rodríguez
Date deposited: 21 Oct 2008
Last modified: 02 Oct 2014 12:13


Balakrishnan H; Deo N (2006). Discovering communities in complex networks. Pro-ceedings of the Annual Southeast Regional Conference, 44. New York: Association for Computing Machinery. P. 280-285.

Beaver D; Rosen R (1978). Studies in scien-tific collaboration. Part I. The professional origins of scientific co-authorship. Scien-tometrics, 1, p. 65-84.

Bordons M; Zulueta MA (1997). Comparison of research team activity in two biomedical fields. Scientometrics, 40 (3), p. 423-436.

Calero C; Buter R; Cabello C; Noyons ECM (2006). How to identify research groups using publication analysis: an example in the field of nanotechnology. Scientomet-rics, 66 (2), p. 365-376.

Chen C; Carr L (1999a). Visualizing the evolution of a subject domain: a case study. IEEE Visualization. San Francisco: IEEE Computer Society. P. 449-452.

Chen C; Carr L (1999b). A semantic-centric approach to information visualization. In-ternational Conference on Information Visualisation, 3. Londres: IEEE Computer Society. P. 18-23.

Chen C; Paul RJ (2001). Visualizing a knowl-edge domain's intellectual structure. IEEE Computer, 34 (3), p. 65-71.

Chen C; Paul RJ; O'Keefe B (2001). Fitting the jigsaw of citation: information visualization in domain analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52 (4), p. 315-330.

Cohen JE (1991). Size, age and productivity of scientific and technical research groups. Scientometrics, 20 (3), p. 395-416.

Ding Y; Chowdhury GG; Foo S (2000). Jour-nal as markers of intellectual space: journal co-citation analysis of information re-trieval area, 1987-1997. Scientometrics, 47 (1), p. 55-73.

Donetti L; Muñoz MA (2004). Detecting net-work communities: a new systematic and efficient algorithm. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 10012, p. 1-15.

Etzkowitz H (2003). Research groups as quasy-firms: the invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Pol-icy, 32 (1), p. 109-121.

Gálvez C; Moya-Anegón F (2006). The unifi-cation of institutional addresses applying parametrized finite-state graphs (P-FSG). Scientometrics, 69 (2), p. 323-345.

Gálvez C; Moya-Anegón F (2007). Standardizing formats of corporate source data. Scientometrics, 70 (1), p. 3-26.

Harsanyi MA (1993). Multiple authors, multi-ple problems. Bibliometrics and the study of scholarly collaboration: a literature re-view. Library and Information Science Re-search, 15, p. 325-354.

McCain KW (1990). Mapping authors in intel-lectual space: a technical overview. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 41 (6), p. 433-443.

Melin G; Persson O (1996). Studying research collaboration using co-authorships. Scien-tometrics, 36 (3), p. 363-377.

Moreno JL (1953). Who shall survive? Foun-dations of sociometry, group psychother-apy and sociodrama. New York: Beacon House.

Moya-Anegón F; Jiménez Contreras E; Mone-da Corrochano M (1998). Research fronts in library and information science in Spain. Scientometrics, 42 (2), p. 229-246.

Newman MEJ (2004a). Detecting community structure in networks. European Physical Journal B, 38, p. 321-330.

Newman MEJ (2004b). Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101 (suppl. 1), p. 5200-5205.

Noyons ECM; Moed HF; van Raan AFJ (1999). Integrating research performance analysis and science mapping. Scientomet-rics, 46 (3), p. 591-604.

Palla G; Derényi I; Farkas I; Vicsek T 2005). Uncovering the overlapping community structure of complex networks in nature and society. Nature, 435, p. 814-818.

Radicchi F; Castellano C; Cecconi F; Loreto V; Parisi D (2004). Defining and identify-ing communities in networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101 (9), p. 2658-2663.

Reichardt J; Bornholdt S (2004). Detecting fuzzy community structures in complex networks with a potts model. Physical Re-view Letters, 93 (21), p. 218701-1-218701-4.

Seglen PO; Aksnes DW (2000). Scientific pro-ductivity and group size: a bibliometric analysis of Norwegian microbiological re-search. Scientometrics, 49 (1), p. 125-143.

Vargas-Quesada B; Moya-Anegón F (2007). Visualizing the structure of science. Berlin: Springer.

von Tunzelmann N; Ranga M; Martin BR; Ge-una A (2003). The effects of size on re-search performance: a SPRU review. Brighton: University of Sussex.

White HD; McCain KW (1997). Visualization of literatures. Annual Review of Informa-tion Science and Technology, 32, p. 99-168.

Wu F; Huberman BA (2004). Finding commu-nities in linear time: A physics approach. European Physical Journal B, 38 (2), p. 331-338.

Zulueta MA; Bordons M (1999). A global ap-proach to the study of teams in multidisci-plinary research areas through bibliometric indicators. Research Evaluation, 8 (2), p. 111-118.


Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item