卓越学术合作特征：模式、强度及影响力视角

科研管理 ›› 2014, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (9): 106-114.

卓越学术合作特征：模式、强度及影响力视角

缪亚军¹, 孙见山², 戚巍³

1. 河海大学商学院, 江苏南京 210098;
2. 香港城市大学资讯系统系, 香港九龙 999077;
3. 中国科学技术大学高等教育研究所, 安徽合肥 230026

收稿日期:2012-12-15 修回日期:2014-02-27 出版日期:2014-09-25 发布日期:2014-10-22
作者简介:缪亚军（1986-），男，江苏如东人，河海大学商学院教师，研究方向：知识管理与竞争情报。
孙见山（1987-），男，安徽淮南人，香港城市大学资讯系统系博士研究生，研究方向：信息推荐。
戚巍（1975-），男，陕西西安人，博士，助理研究员，中国科学技术大学高等教育研究所副所长，研究方向：科技政策与教育管理。
基金资助:
中国科学院与中国科学技术大学研究生科技创新与社会实践资助专项资助：首批“985工程”高校科研合作结构测度研究（2012.9-2014.6）；国家自然科学基金：科研创新网络中基于用户特征的推荐方法研究（71171172，2012.1-2015.12）；中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助：文献计量视角下的“985工程”高校学科的演变和评价（2013B33214，2013.11-2015.11）。

An empirical analysis of collaboration characteristics in excellent academics from dimensions of patterns, intensity and impact

Miao Yajun¹, Sun Jianshan², Qi Wei³

1. School of Business，Hohai University，Nanjing 210098, Jiangsu, China;
2. Department of Information Systems, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon 999077, Hong Kong, China;
3. Institute of Higher Education Research, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, Anhui, China

Received:2012-12-15 Revised:2014-02-27 Online:2014-09-25 Published:2014-10-22

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 本文以Web of Science 数据库收录的C9高校H-index论文为样本，利用科学计量学指标，从合作模式、合作强度及影响力维度对合作特征进行了研究，主要有如下发现：（1）合作模式方面，C9高校全体呈“国际合作为主，独立撰写与国内合作并行”走势且不同模式均与影响力高度正相关；C9各校合作模式存在四种走势且不同模式与影响力间相关度需个案分析。（2）合作强度方面，C9高校全体与C9各校基本完全一致，即合作强度从无章可循到呈现一定规律性，且与影响力间均不存在显著相关关系。（3）合作模式与合作强度间不存在明显依赖关系。文末讨论了合作特征产生的可能原因及对中国科研管理实践的指导意义与参考价值。

关键词: 合作模式, 合作强度, 影响力, 985工程, 科研管理

Abstract: Taking the H-index papers of C9 higher institutions collected by the database of Web of Science, this paper analyzes the characteristics of excellent academics by taking the view of collaboration patterns, intensity and impact utilizing scientometrics indicators. The major findings are presented as follows: Firstly, the collaboration pattern of the whole C9 Higher Institutions exhibits "International priority, Domestic and Independent equally", and different collaboration patterns have a significant coefficient with impact, while the collaboration patterns of C9 individuals are four types, and the coefficient between each pattern and impact need to be explored one by one. Secondly, the distribution of collaboration intensity in the whole C9 higher institutions and C9 individuals are mostly the same, that is to say, from rule less to certain regularities, and having no significant coefficient between collaboration intensity and impact. Thirdly, the research also confirms that the dependency is not clear between collaboration patterns and collaboration intensity. Finally, the present article discusses the reasons of the above collaboration characteristics and demonstrates its sense and uses to China's research management.

Key words: collaboration patterns, collaboration intensity, impact, Project 985, research management

中图分类号:

G353.1

缪亚军, 孙见山, 戚巍. 卓越学术合作特征：模式、强度及影响力视角[J]. 科研管理, 2014, 35(9): 106-114.

Miao Yajun, Sun Jianshan, Qi Wei. An empirical analysis of collaboration characteristics in excellent academics from dimensions of patterns, intensity and impact[J]. Science Research Management, 2014, 35(9): 106-114.

参考文献

[1] Haiqi Zhang, Hong Guo.Scientific research collaboration in China[J].Scientometrics, 1997, 38(2), 309-319. [2] UNESCO Institute for Statistics.What do bibliometric indicators tell us about world scientific output?[J].UIS Bulletin on Science and Technology Statistics, 2005, (2):1-6. [3] National Science Board.Science and engineering indicators 2012[EB\OL].http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind12/pdf/seind12.pdf, 2012-12-02. [4] D.deB Beaver, R.Rosen.Studies in scientific collaboration.Part I.The professional origins of scientific co-authorship[J].Scientometics, 1978, 1(1):65-84. [5] Peter van den Besselaar, Sven Hemlin, Inge van der Weijden.Collaboration and competition research[J].Higher Education Policy, 2012, (25):263-266. [6] G.Bammer.Enhancing research collaborations:Three key management challenges[J].Research Policy, 2008, 37(5):875-887. [7] T.Heinze, S.Kuhlmann.Across institutional boundaries? Research collaboration in German public sector nanoscience[J].Research Policy, 2008, 37(5):888-899. [8] R.Sooryamoorthy.Do types of collaboration change citation? Collaboration and citation patterns of South African science publications[J].Scientometrics, 2009, 81(1):177-193. [9] Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Félix de Moya-Anegón, Benjamín Vargas-Quesada, et al.Inter-institutional scientific collaboration:an approach from social network analysis[EB\OL].http://prime_mexico2008.xoc.uam.mx/papers/Zaida_Chinchilla_Inter_institutional_scientific.pdf, 2012-08-31. [10] Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Benjamín Vargas-Quesada, Yusef Hassan-Montero, et al.New approach to the visualization of international scientific collaboration[J].Information Visualization, 2010, 9(4):277-287. [11] L.K.Hessels, H.van Lente.Re-thinking new knowledge production:A literature review and a research agenda——the massification of higher education and the increasing importance of collaboration and globalization[J].Research Policy, 2008, 37 (4):740-760. [12] R.Rousseau.Comments on the modified collaborative coefficient[J].Scientometrics, 2011, 87(1):171-174. [13] L.Egghe.Theory of collaboration and collaborative measures[J].Information Processing & Management, 1991, 27(2-3):177-202. [14] K.Savanur, R.Srikanth, R.Srikanth.Modified collaborative coefficient: a new measure for quantifying the degree of research collaboration[J].Scientometrics, 2010, 84(2):365-371. [15] Chien Hsiang Liao, Hsiuju Rebecca Yen.Quantifying the degree of research collaboration: A comparative study of collaborative measures[J].Journal of Informetrics, 2012, 6 (1):27-33. [16] P.Zhou, L.Leydesdorff.China ranks second in scientific publications since 2006[EB\OL].http://www.leydesdorff.net/issi13/issi13.pdf, 2012-12-03. [17] Y.Wang, Y.S.Wu, Y.T.Pan, Z.Ma, R.Rousseau.Scientific collaboration in China as reflected in co-authorship[J].Scientometrics, 2005, 62 (2):183-198. [18] C.King.Multinational coauthorship:Has collaboration peaked[J].Science Watch, 1996, 7, 1-2. [19] S.Arunachalam, R.Srinivasan, V.Raman.International collaboration in science:Participation by the Asian giants[J].Scientometrics, 1994, 30(1), 7-22. [20] B.H.Jin, R.Rousseau. China's Quantitative Expansion Phase Exponential Growth but Low Impact[EB\OL].https://uhdspace.uhasselt.be/dspace/handle/1942/876, 2012-11-28. [21] S.Arunachalam, M.J.Doss.Mapping international collaboration in science in Asia through coauthorship analysis[J].Current Science, 2010, 79 (5):621-628. [22] Xianwen Wang, Shenmeng Xu, Zhi Wang, Lian Peng, Chuanli Wang.International scientific collaboration of China:collaborating countries, institutions and individuals[J].Scientometrcs, 2012, DOI 10.1007/s11192-012-0877-4. [23] B.F.Jones, S.Wuchty, B.Uzzi.Multi-university research teams:shifting impact, geography, and stratification in science[J].Science, 2008, 322(21):1259-1262. [24] J.E.Hirsch.An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output[J].Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2005, 102(46):16569-16572. [25] W.Glänzel.刘俊婉译.也谈h指数的机会和局限性[J].科学观察, 2006(1):10-11. [26] 黃慕萱.H-index在大學層級學術評估之應用[J].高教評鑑, 2008(1):29-50. [27] 万锦堃, 花平寰, 赵呈刚.中国部分重点大学h指数的探讨[J].科学观察, 2007, 2(3):9-16. [28] 缪亚军, 李峰, 戚巍.卓越学术国际合作特征研究——基于年代与国别二维视角[J].科学学研究, 2013(8):1141-1151. [29] 缪亚军, 郭江江, 戚巍.学科视角下卓越学术国际合作国别特征研究[J].科学学研究, 2013(9):1296-1303. [30] J.S.Katz, B.R.Martin.What is Research Collaboration?[J].Research Policy, 1997, 26(1):1-18. [31] He, Z.-L., Geng, X.-S., & Campbell-Hunt, C.Research collaboration and research output:A longitudinal study of 65 biomedical scientists in a New Zealand university[J].Research Policy, 2009, 38(2), 306-317. [32] CWTS.Annual Research Report 2007[EB\OL].http://www.cwts.nl/pdf/Annual_Research_Report_2007. pdf, 2012-8-25. [33] T.L.B.Ossenblok, F.T.Verleysen, T.C.E.Engels.Patterns of Co-Authorship in Journal Articles in the Social Sciences and Humanities (2000-2010)[EB\OL].http://sticonference.org/Proceedings/vol2/Ossenblok_Patterns_640.pdf, 2012-8-30.