↓ Skip to main content

With whom do researchers collaborate and why?

Overview of attention for article published in Scientometrics, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
8 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
156 Mendeley
Title
With whom do researchers collaborate and why?
Published in
Scientometrics, April 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11192-017-2386-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hajdeja Iglič, Patrick Doreian, Luka Kronegger, Anuška Ferligoj

Abstract

Although research collaboration has been studied extensively, we still lack understanding regarding the factors stimulating researchers to collaborate with different kinds of research partners including members of the same research center or group, researchers from the same organization, researchers from other academic and non-academic organizations as well as international partners. Here, we provide an explanation of the emergence of diverse collaborative ties. The theoretical framework used for understanding research collaboration couples scientific and technical human capital embodied in the individual with the social organization and cognitive characteristics of the research field. We analyze survey data collected from Slovenian scientists in four scientific disciplines: mathematics; physics; biotechnology; and sociology. The results show that while individual characteristics and resources are among the strongest predictors of collaboration, very different mechanisms underlie collaboration with different kinds of partners. International collaboration is particularly important for the researchers in small national science systems. Collaboration with colleagues from various domestic organizations presents a vehicle for resource mobilization. Within organizations collaboration reflects the elaborated division of labor in the laboratories and high level of competition between different research groups. These results hold practical implications for policymakers interested in promoting quality research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 156 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 154 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 24 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 10%
Student > Master 15 10%
Other 10 6%
Professor 10 6%
Other 37 24%
Unknown 45 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 35 22%
Business, Management and Accounting 13 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 5%
Computer Science 7 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Other 32 21%
Unknown 55 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 June 2021.
All research outputs
#1,934,180
of 22,963,381 outputs
Outputs from Scientometrics
#406
of 2,689 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,616
of 310,038 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientometrics
#16
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,963,381 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,689 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,038 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.