Co-authorship, Homophily, and Scholarly Influence in Information Systems Research

Information Systems (IS) researchers have increasingly focused attention on understanding the identity of our field (Hirschheim & Klein 2003; Lyytinen & King 2004). One facet of any discipline’s identity is the social aspect of how its scholars actually conduct their work (DeSanctis 2003), which is formally labeled as the study of sociology of science. Contributing to this tradition of work, we empirically examine scholarly influence (Acedo et al., 2006); scientific collaboration, including metrics that capture the prevalence of c-oauthored work; antecedents to co-authorship; and the effect of co-authorship on subsequent citations. Based on analyzing five leading IS journals for a period of seven years, we found that co-authored papers have become increasingly common in leading IS journals and that co-authoring continues to be more prevalent in journals published in North America compared to European journals. Moreover, we found significant effects of homophily related to gender, homophily/proximity, and geography. IS scholars worldwide exhibit a stronger preference for collaborating with co-authors of the same sex and those who attended the same PhD program than one would expect by chance. We also examined differences among journals and found some intriguing results for the effect of co-authorship on citations. Overall, we found evidence that the number of co-authors was positively related to citations although there was some variance across journals. These findings point to a need for more research to better understand both the processes of collaboration and the drivers and downstream benefits associated with it

Homophily in higher education research: A perspective based on co-authorships

Research collaborations are the norm in science today, and are usually evaluated using co-authorships as the unit of analysis. Research collaborations have been typically analyzed using a mapping perspective that focuses on countries, institutions, or individuals, or by assessments of the determinants of research collaboration, i.e., who engages in collaborations and who collaborates the most. One analytical perspective that has been used less frequently is the homophily perspective, which attempts to understand the likelihood of research collaborations based on the similarity of collaborators’ preferences and attributes. In addition, compared to studies focused on the fields of the natural and exact sciences, engineering, and the health sciences, research collaborations in the social sciences have been underexamined in the literature, despite the growing numbers of social scientists who engage in such collaborations. This study assessed homophily with respect to geographical, ascribed, acquired and career-related attributes in co-authorships in the social sciences, based on a co-authorship matrix of 913 higher education researchers. The findings showed that geographic and institutional attributes were by far the most powerful homophilic drivers of collaborations, suggesting the importance of physical proximity, national incentives, and shared culture, language, and identity. Another driver was the similarity of acquired attributes, particularly certain preferences regarding research agendas; these absorbed the residual explanatory power that ascribed attributes such as gender or age had in co-authorship preferences. The study is novel in its analysis of the extent to which similarities in the research agendas of researchers predicted co-authorship. The findings indicate the need for further co-authorship homophily analyses around a broader set of acquired attributes and the trajectories that lead to them.info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersio

Collaboration in sensor network research: an in-depth longitudinal analysis of assortative mixing patterns

Many investigations of scientific collaboration are based on statistical analyses of large networks constructed from bibliographic repositories. These investigations often rely on a wealth of bibliographic data, but very little or no other information about the individuals in the network, and thus, fail to illustrate the broader social and academic landscape in which collaboration takes place. In this article, we perform an in-depth longitudinal analysis of a relatively small network of scientific collaboration (N = 291) constructed from the bibliographic record of a research center involved in the development and application of sensor network and wireless technologies. We perform a preliminary analysis of selected structural properties of the network, computing its range, configuration and topology. We then support our preliminary statistical analysis with an in-depth temporal investigation of the assortative mixing of selected node characteristics, unveiling the researchers' propensity to collaborate preferentially with others with a similar academic profile. Our qualitative analysis of mixing patterns offers clues as to the nature of the scientific community being modeled in relation to its organizational, disciplinary, institutional, and international arrangements of collaboration.Comment: Scientometrics (In press

Gender Disparities in Science? Dropout, Productivity, Collaborations and Success of Male and Female Computer Scientists

Scientific collaborations shape ideas as well as innovations and are both the substrate for, and the outcome of, academic careers. Recent studies show that gender inequality is still present in many scientific practices ranging from hiring to peer-review processes and grant applications. In this work, we investigate gender-specific differences in collaboration patterns of more than one million computer scientists over the course of 47 years. We explore how these patterns change over years and career ages and how they impact scientific success. Our results highlight that successful male and female scientists reveal the same collaboration patterns: compared to scientists in the same career age, they tend to collaborate with more colleagues than other scientists, seek innovations as brokers and establish longer-lasting and more repetitive collaborations. However, women are on average less likely to adapt the collaboration patterns that are related with success, more likely to embed into ego networks devoid of structural holes, and they exhibit stronger gender homophily as well as a consistently higher dropout rate than men in all career ages

Gender disparities and positioning in collaborative hospitality and tourism research

Purpose: To explore gender disparities in the production of tourism knowledge with particular reference to academic journals. Design/methodology/approach: Authorship and co-authorship analyses were conducted of data extracted from articles and research notes published between 1965 and 2016 in 25 hospitality and tourism journals. Findings: Gender imbalances are evident in the production of knowledge, though the disparities appear to be decreasing. While heterophilic research collaborations (those between men and women) show some evidence of higher productivity, homophilic collaborations (between males) have greater impact. The findings highlight gender imbalances in international collaborations, in SSCI listed journals, in first authoring, and by country. There is evidence of higher collaborative levels amongst male authors and the differences have increased over time. The positioning of men and women within tourism scholarly networks shows no marked differences. Practical Implications: This data-driven analysis provides decision-makers and policymakers with evidence to support well targeted programs that advance female contributions in hospitality and tourism research collaborations. For example, senior academics and University administrators might offer support for female researchers to become more actively involved in hospitality and tourism research groups and projects. Universities or schools might also seek to encourage collaborations between male and female researchers in their performance indicators. Originality/Value: This study is one of the first to examine gender disparities and positioning in collaborative hospitality and tourism research

The Social Structure of the Information Systems Collaboration Network: Centers of Influence and Antecedents of Tie Formation

In this study, we examine the historical information systems research collaboration network. We build the network using coauthorship information in the Senior Scholars’ basket of eight journals from the publication of MISQ’s first issue in April, 1977, to November, 2015. The different journals vary widely in their network configurations. We examine the influence of gender homophily, geographic homophily, and field tenure heterophily on coauthorship in the network. From using exponential random graph modeling (ERGM) on a randomly selected subset of the network, we present preliminary evidence that suggests that ties in the IS collaboration network exhibit homophily according to gender and geography. Conversely, coauthorship seems to exhibit heterophily along the temporal dimension: short-tenured researchers in the field prefer to collaborate with long-tenured researchers. ERGM enables one to make statistical inferences concerning the influence of node attributes and structural variables on network formation, which is hard to do with logistical regression because network relationships violate the independence of observations assumption. We also reveal the current center of the IS collaboration network. Based on this center, we propose a metric to measure a researcher’s connectedness in the network

Analyzing the network structure and gender differences among the members of the Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) community

In this paper, we analyze a major part of the research output of the Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) community in the period 2000-2016 from a network analytical perspective. We focus on the papers presented at the European and US NKOS workshops and in addition four special issues on NKOS in the last 16 years. For this purpose, we have generated an open dataset, the "NKOS bibliography" which covers the bibliographic information of the research output. We analyze the co-authorship network of this community which results in 123 papers with a sum of 256 distinct authors. We use standard network analytic measures such as degree, betweenness and closeness centrality to describe the co-authorship network of the NKOS dataset. First, we investigate global properties of the network over time. Second, we analyze the centrality of the authors in the NKOS network. Lastly, we investigate gender differences in collaboration behavior in this community. Our results show that apart from differences in centrality measures of the scholars, they have higher tendency to collaborate with those in the same institution or the same geographic proximity. We also find that homophily is higher among women in this community. Apart from small differences in closeness and clustering among men and women, we do not find any significant dissimilarities with respect to other centralities