Skip to main content
Log in

Mapping research collaborations in different countries and regions: 1980–2019

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Most previous studies on research collaboration focus on only one particular indicator or several specific countries. The intention of this work is to examine and compare research collaborations performances in the 41 most productive countries or regions. To this end, we use indicators stemming from authorship datasets from Web of Science an InCites from 1980 to 2019. Five collaboration indicators, with respect to both the size and heterogeneity of research collaboration, were systematically examined. Results showed diversified views of collaboration patterns in different countries or regions by using different collaboration indicators. In the end, we analyzed the correlations between different collaboration indicators and synthesized them by descending dimension method.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aboukhalil, R. (2014). The rising trend in authorship. The Winnower, 7, e141832.26907. https://doi.org/10.15200/winn.141832.26907

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, J. (2013). The fourth age of research. Nature,497(7451), 557–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, J., Pendlebury, D., Potter, R., & Szomszor, M. (2019). Global Research Report: Multi-authorship and research analytics. London UK: Clarivate Analytics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aman, V. (2016). How collaboration impacts citation flows within the German science system. Scientometrics,109(3), 2195–2216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baba, Y., Shichijo, N., & Sedita, S. R. (2009). How do collaborations with universities affect firms’ innovative performance? The role of “Pasteur scientists” in the advanced materials field. Research Policy,38(5), 756–764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bodas Freitas, I. M., Marques, R. A., de Paula, E., & Silva, E. M. (2013). University-industry collaboration and innovation in emergent and mature industries in new industrialized countries. Research Policy,42(2), 443–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., & Corley, E. (2004). Scientists’ collaboration strategies: Implications for scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy,33(4), 599–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Z., & Guan, J. (2010). The impact of small world on innovation: An empirical study of 16 countries. Journal of Informetrics,4(1), 97–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glanzel, W., & Thijs, B. (2004). Does co-authorship inflate the share of self-citations? Scientometrics,61(3), 395–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guan, J., Yan, Y., & Zhang, J. J. (2017). The impact of collaboration and knowledge networks on citations. Journal of Informetrics,11(2), 407–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, J., & Huang, D. (2011). Correlation between impact and collaboration. Scientometrics,86(2), 317–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, Z., Chen, C., & Liu, Z. (2014). How are collaboration and productivity correlated at various career stages of scientists? Scientometrics,101(2), 1553–1564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, Z., Lin, G., Sun, T., & Wang, X. (2018). An EU without the UK: Mapping the UK’s changing roles in the EU scientific research. Scientometrics,115(3), 1185–1198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J. S., & Hicks, D. (1997). How much is a collaboration worth? A calibrated bibliometric model. Scientometrics,40(3), 541–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy,26(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science,35(5), 673–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melin, G. (1996). The networking university—A study of a Swedish university using institutional co-authorships as an indicator. Scientometrics,35(1), 15–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, C. S., Whetsell, T. A., & Leydesdorff, L. (2017). Growth of international collaboration in science: Revisiting six specialties. Scientometrics,110(3), 1633–1652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, X., Xu, S., Wang, Z., Peng, L., & Wang, C. (2013). International scientific collaboration of China: Collaborating countries, institutions and individuals. Scientometrics,95(3), 885–894.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoshikane, F., & Kageura, K. (2004). Comparative analysis of coauthorship networks of different domains: The growth and change of networks. Scientometrics,60(3), 433–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 71974030) and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of China.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhigang Hu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hu, Z., Tian, W., Guo, J. et al. Mapping research collaborations in different countries and regions: 1980–2019. Scientometrics 124, 729–745 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03484-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03484-8

Keywords

Navigation