The structure of segregation in co-authorship networks and its impact on scientific production

IF 3 2区 计算机科学 Q1 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS EPJ Data Science Pub Date : 2023-10-09 DOI:10.1140/epjds/s13688-023-00411-8
Ana Maria Jaramillo, Hywel T. P. Williams, Nicola Perra, Ronaldo Menezes
{"title":"The structure of segregation in co-authorship networks and its impact on scientific production","authors":"Ana Maria Jaramillo, Hywel T. P. Williams, Nicola Perra, Ronaldo Menezes","doi":"10.1140/epjds/s13688-023-00411-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Co-authorship networks, where nodes represent authors and edges represent co-authorship relations, are key to understanding the production and diffusion of knowledge in academia. Social constructs, biases (implicit and explicit), and constraints (e.g. spatial, temporal) affect who works with whom and cause co-authorship networks to organise into tight communities with different levels of segregation. We aim to examine aspects of the co-authorship network structure that lead to segregation and its impact on scientific production. We measure segregation using the Spectral Segregation Index (SSI) and find four ordered categories: completely segregated, highly segregated, moderately segregated and non-segregated communities. We direct our attention to the non-segregated and highly segregated communities, quantifying and comparing their structural topologies and k -core positions. When considering communities of both categories (controlling for size), our results show no differences in density and clustering but substantial variability in the core position. Larger non-segregated communities are more likely to occupy cores near the network nucleus, while the highly segregated ones tend to be closer to the network periphery. Finally, we analyse differences in citations gained by researchers within communities of different segregation categories. Researchers in highly segregated communities get more citations from their community members in middle cores and gain more citations per publication in middle/periphery cores. Those in non-segregated communities get more citations per publication in the nucleus. To our knowledge, this work is the first to characterise community segregation in co-authorship networks and investigate the relationship between community segregation and author citations. Our results help study highly segregated communities of scientific co-authors and can pave the way for intervention strategies to improve the growth and dissemination of scientific knowledge.","PeriodicalId":11887,"journal":{"name":"EPJ Data Science","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EPJ Data Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1140/epjds/s13688-023-00411-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Co-authorship networks, where nodes represent authors and edges represent co-authorship relations, are key to understanding the production and diffusion of knowledge in academia. Social constructs, biases (implicit and explicit), and constraints (e.g. spatial, temporal) affect who works with whom and cause co-authorship networks to organise into tight communities with different levels of segregation. We aim to examine aspects of the co-authorship network structure that lead to segregation and its impact on scientific production. We measure segregation using the Spectral Segregation Index (SSI) and find four ordered categories: completely segregated, highly segregated, moderately segregated and non-segregated communities. We direct our attention to the non-segregated and highly segregated communities, quantifying and comparing their structural topologies and k -core positions. When considering communities of both categories (controlling for size), our results show no differences in density and clustering but substantial variability in the core position. Larger non-segregated communities are more likely to occupy cores near the network nucleus, while the highly segregated ones tend to be closer to the network periphery. Finally, we analyse differences in citations gained by researchers within communities of different segregation categories. Researchers in highly segregated communities get more citations from their community members in middle cores and gain more citations per publication in middle/periphery cores. Those in non-segregated communities get more citations per publication in the nucleus. To our knowledge, this work is the first to characterise community segregation in co-authorship networks and investigate the relationship between community segregation and author citations. Our results help study highly segregated communities of scientific co-authors and can pave the way for intervention strategies to improve the growth and dissemination of scientific knowledge.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
合作作者网络中的隔离结构及其对科学成果的影响
共同作者网络是理解学术界知识生产和传播的关键,节点代表作者,边缘代表共同作者关系。社会结构、偏见(隐性和显性)和约束(如空间、时间)影响着谁与谁合作,并导致合著网络组织成具有不同程度隔离的紧密社区。我们的目标是研究导致隔离的共同作者网络结构的各个方面及其对科学生产的影响。我们使用光谱隔离指数(SSI)测量隔离,并找到四个有序的类别:完全隔离,高度隔离,适度隔离和非隔离社区。我们将注意力集中在非隔离和高度隔离的社区,量化和比较它们的结构拓扑和k -核心位置。当考虑这两个类别的群落(控制大小)时,我们的结果显示密度和聚类没有差异,但核心位置有很大的变化。较大的非隔离社区更有可能占据靠近网络核心的核心,而高度隔离的社区往往更靠近网络外围。最后,我们分析了研究人员在不同隔离类别的群体中获得的引文差异。高度隔离社区的研究人员从中间核心的社区成员那里获得了更多的引用,而在中间/外围核心,每篇论文获得了更多的引用。那些在非种族隔离社区的人在核心群体中每篇文章得到更多的引用。据我们所知,这项工作是第一次描述共同作者网络中的社区隔离,并调查社区隔离与作者引用之间的关系。我们的研究结果有助于研究高度隔离的科学共同作者群体,并为干预策略铺平道路,以改善科学知识的增长和传播。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
EPJ Data Science
EPJ Data Science MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS -
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
5.60%
发文量
53
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: EPJ Data Science covers a broad range of research areas and applications and particularly encourages contributions from techno-socio-economic systems, where it comprises those research lines that now regard the digital “tracks” of human beings as first-order objects for scientific investigation. Topics include, but are not limited to, human behavior, social interaction (including animal societies), economic and financial systems, management and business networks, socio-technical infrastructure, health and environmental systems, the science of science, as well as general risk and crisis scenario forecasting up to and including policy advice.
期刊最新文献
Comparison of home detection algorithms using smartphone GPS data What relational event models can reveal: Commentary on Thomas Grund’s “Dynamics of Denunciation: The Limits of a Scandal” On the duration of face-to-face contacts Computational social science with confidence Public perception of generative AI on Twitter: an empirical study based on occupation and usage
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1