Evaluating Authorship Variation Patterns in English-Medium Astrophysics Research Papers: An Across Journal and Diachronic Study (1998-2012)

This paper explores authorship practices from a diachronic perspective in a corpus of 300 randomly selected research papers published in the most prestigious Astrophysics English-medium journals. Our main results show that 21 variants were recorded in the number of authors in the whole sample and that multi-authored research papers far outnumber single-authored ones. They also reveal a growth not only in the number of authors, but also in the number of multi-authored research papers over time, mainly in those contributed by more than seven authors. From a specific diachronic perspective, each journal has its own authorship variation patterns and variants, which are analysed and explained in relation to their specific scope and to the socio-economic and political situation in each geographic context (European countries and the USA).En este artículo hemos analizado las prácticas autoriales en una muestra seleccionada al azar compuesta por 300 artículos de investigación publicados en tres periodos diferentes (1998, 2004 y 2012) en las más prestigiosas revistas de Astrofísica publicadas en inglés en Europa y Estados Unidos de Norteamérica. Hemos hallado una gama de 21 variantes en el número de autores en toda la muestra analizada. También hemos apreciado que los artículos de investigación con autoría colectiva son muchos más numerosos que los de autoría individual. Asimismo, hemos observado que no sólo ha ido creciendo el número de autores, sino también el número de artículos con autoría colectiva, principalmente en aquellos redactados por más de siete autores. En términos diacrónicos específicos, hemos comprobado que cada revista posee sus propias variantes y patrones de variación autoriales, que hemos explicado en relación a su ámbito específico y a la situación socio-económica y política en ambos contextos geográficos (países europeos y EE.UU.).Françoise Salager-Meyer was supported by Grant No. CDCHTA-M-1039-13-06 from the University of Los Andes Research Centre

Does distance hinder the collaboration between Australian universities in the humanities, arts and social sciences?

Australia is a vast country with an average distance of 1911 km between its eight state capital cities. The quantitative impact of this distance on collaboration practices between Australian universities and between different types of Australian universities has not been examined previously and hence our knowledge about the spatial distribution effects, if any, on collaboration practices and opportunities is very limited. The aim of the study reported here was therefore to analyse the effect of distance on the collaboration activities of humanities, arts and social science scholars in Australia, using co-authorship as a proxy for collaboration. In order to do this, gravity models were developed to determine the distance effects on external collaboration between universities in relation to geographic region and institutional alliance of 25 Australian universities. Although distance was found to have a weak impact on external collaboration, the strength of the research publishing record within a university (internal collaboration) was found to be an important factor in determining external collaboration activity levels. This finding would suggest that increasing internal collaboration within universities could be an effective strategy to encourage external collaboration between universities. This strategy becomes even more effective for universities that are further away from each other. Establishing a hierarchical structure of different types of universities within a region can optimise the location advantage in the region to encourage knowledge exchange within that region. The stronger network could also attract more collaboration between networks

Evaluating Authorship Variation Patterns in English-Medium Astrophysic Research Papers: An Across Journal and Diachronic Study (1998-2012)

En este artículo hemos analizado las prácticas autoriales en una muestra seleccionada al azar compuesta por 300 artículos de investigación publicados en tres periodos diferentes (1998, 2004 y 2012) en las más prestigiosas revistas de Astrofísica publicadas en inglés en Europa y Estados Unidos de Norteamérica. Hemos hallado una gama de 21 variantes en el número de autores en toda la muestra analizada. También hemos apreciado que los artículos de investigación con autoría colectiva son muchos más numerosos que los de autoría individual. Asimismo, hemos observado que no sólo ha ido creciendo el número de autores, sino también el número de artículos con autoría colectiva, principalmente en aquellos redactados por más de siete autores. En términos diacrónicos específicos, hemos comprobado que cada revista posee sus propias variantes y patrones de variación autoriales, que hemos explicado en relación a su ámbito específico y a la situación socio-económica y política en ambos contextos geográficos (países europeos y EE.UU.).This paper explores authorship practices from a diachronic perspective in a corpus of 300 randomly selected research papers published in the most prestigious Astrophysics Englishmedium journals. Our main results show that 21 variants were recorded in the number of authors in the whole sample and that multi-authored research papers far outnumber single-authored ones. They also reveal a growth not only in the number of authors, but also in the number of multi-authored research papers over time, mainly in those contributed by more than seven authors. From a specific diachronic perspective, each journal has its own authorship variation patterns and variants, which are analysed and explained in relation to their specific scope and to the socio-economic and political situation in each geographic context (European countries and the USA)

The Effects of the EU’s Scientific Cooperation Programmes on the Eastern Partnership Countries: Scientific Output and Broader Societal Impact

Scientific cooperation between the European Union (EU) and its Eastern neighbours has grown rapidly since the early 2000s. This cooperation holds great promise to influence not only the science and innovation sectors, but also to affect the practices and values of research communities in the Eastern Partnership (EaP) countries, their public policies, and societies at large. In this paper we aim to assess the impact of scientific cooperation with the EU with a focus on three countries of the EaP: Belarus, Moldova, and Ukraine. Our analysis is divided into two parts: first, we focus on the scientific impact and conduct a bibliometric analysis that tracks several important indicators of the scientific output of Belarus, Moldova, and Ukraine for the period of 2000-2016; second, we address the broader impact on the scientific community, institutions, and society by analysing new data from expert interviews. In terms of scientific output we find that while the EU has not radically transformed science in the EaP countries it might have provided it with an essential lifeline of support. We also uncover clear evidence for positive impact of cooperation with the EU on the participating institutions from the EaP countries, but very little evidence (so far) about effects on public policies or significant impact on society at large.Horizon 2020(H2020)No. 693382The politics and administration of institutional chang

Ethical and Responsible Behavior in Applied Empirical Research: Four Essays on Academic Practices in the Social Sciences

In a world filled with fake news and alternative facts, public trust in science is of utmost importance. Yet scandals like the cases of Diederik Stapel and Ulrich Lichtenthaler have questioned the integrity of scholars and their research results. To address this issue, several scientists investigated academic (mal)practices like plagiarism, HARKing, authorship misuse and data flexibility. The results were devastating and ignited a credibility crisis, especially in the social sciences. Fortunately, we already can see the light at the end of the tunnel as editors, publishers, research societies and universities have started to introduce techniques and infrastructure that ensure ethical and responsible scholarly behavior. For example, artificial intelligence has enabled plagiarism detection software to not only check for copy-pasting but also for content and reference similarities. Moreover, more and more journals motivate or sometimes even require researchers to pre-register their research hypotheses prior to data collection and/or data analysis to prevent HARKing. In the life sciences, contribution disclosure statements force authors to transparently report the contributions of each researcher involved in a research project. In the social sciences, several articles and editorials highlighted that ensuring replicability by means of transparent reporting and data sharing allows detecting and overcoming flexible and questionable data handling practices. This thesis builds upon the existing body of literature and provides guidance for those academic (mal)practices that have been covered only rudimentarily in the social sciences

Karakteristike hrvatske nacionalne i međunarodne znanstvene produkcije u društveno-humanističkim znanostima i umjetničkom području za razdoblje 1991-2005

Ova knjiga pokušaj je dobivanja što cjelovitije slike stanja produktivnosti hrvatskih znanstvenika iz društveno-humanističkih znanosti i umjetničkog područja u razdoblju od 1991. do 2005. godine. Pod pojmom cjelovitosti podrazumijevamo obuhvaćenost gotovo svih vrsta u Hrvatskoj objavljenih publikacija klasificiranih kao potencijalno znanstvenih, kao i radova objavljenih u međunarodnim časopisima indeksiranim u, najčešće za ove svrhe korištenoj, citatnoj i bibliografskoj bazi WoS (Web of Science). Istraživanjem su obuhvaćeni svi registrirani aktivni znanstvenici uključujući i znanstvene novake. Za radove koji su indeksirani u bazi WoS, kao pokazatelj prepoznatljivosti i odjeka radova kojima je barem jedan autor bio iz Hrvatske, istražena je i citiranost