Home /Archive /2020 /2020 №7 /2020_7_4

Visn. Nac. Akad. Nauk Ukr. 2020.(7):34-48
https://doi.org/10.15407/visn2020.07.034

Olesya I. Mryglod
Institute for Condensed Matter Physics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Lviv, Ukraine
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4415-7061

Ihor M. Mryglod
Institute for Condensed Matter Physics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Lviv, Ukraine
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0154-9076

COLLECTIVE AUTHORSHIP IN UKRAINIAN SCIENCE: MARGINAL EFFECT OR NEW PHENOMENON?

One of the features of modern science is the formation of stable large collaborations of researchers working together within the projects that require the concentration of huge financial and human resources. Results of such common work are published in scientific papers by large co-authorship teams that include sometimes thousands of names. The goal of this work is to study the influence of such publications on the values of scientometric indicators calculated for individuals, research groups and science of Ukraine in general. Bibliometric data related to Ukraine, some academic institutions and selected individual researchers were collected from Scopus database and used for our study. It is demonstrated that while the relative share of publications by collective authors is comparatively small, their presence in a general pool can lead to statistically significant effects. The obtained results clearly show that traditional quantitative approaches for research assessment should be changed in order to take into account this phenomenon.
Keywords: collective authorship, scientometrics, group science, Ukraine.

Language of article: ukrainian

Full text (PDF)

REFERENCES

  1. Fleck L. Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact. (ed by T.J. Trenn and R.K. Merton, foreword by T. Kuhn), Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979.
  2. Price D.D.S. Little Science, Big Science. New York: Columbia University, 1963. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7312/pric91844
  3. Subramanyam K. Bibliometric studies of research collaboration: a review. Journal of information Science. 1983. 6(1): 33–38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/016555158300600105
  4. Wuchty S., Jones B.F., Uzzi B. The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science. 2007. 316(5827): 1036–1039. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1136099
  5. Fortunato S., Bergstrom C.T., Borner K., Evans J.A., Helbing D., Milojevic S., Petersen A.M., Radicchi F., Sinatra R., Uzzi B., Vespignani A. Science of science. Science. 2018. 359(6379): eaao0185. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao0185
  6. Holovatch Yu., Krasnytska M., Mryglod O., Rovenchak A. Twenty years of the Journal of physical studies. An attempt at a journalometric analysis. Journal of Physical Studies. 2017. 21(4): 4001-19. (in Ukrainian).
  7. Mryglod O. Scientometric analysis of Condensed Matter Physics journal. Condensed Matter Physics. 2018. 21(2): 22801. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5488/cmp.21.22801
  8. Radchenko A.I., Mryglod O.I. "Mineralogical journal"(Ukraine): 40 years of history. Mineralogical journal. 2019. 41(1): 3–14. (in Ukrainian). DOI: https://doi.org/10.15407/mineraljournal.41.01.003
  9. Collins F.S., Morgan M., Patrinos A. The Human Genome Project: lessons from large-scale biology. Science. 2003. 300(5617): 286–290. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1084564
  10. The Large Hadron Collider. https://home.cern/science/accelerators/large-hadron-collider
  11. Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron. HERA. http://www.desy.de/research/facilities__projects/hera/index_eng.html
  12. Abramo G., D’Angelo C.A., Di Costa F. The role of geographical proximity in knowledge diffusion, measured by citations to scientific literature. Journal of Informetrics. 2020. 14(1): 101010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2020.101010
  13. Hoekman J., Frenken K., Tijssen R.J. Research collaboration at a distance: Changing spatial patterns of scientific collaboration within Europe. Research policy. 2010. 39(5): 662–673. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.01.012
  14. Kumar S. Ethical Concerns in the Rise of Co-Authorship and Its Role as a Proxy of Research Collaborations. Publications. 2018. 6(3): 37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/publications6030037
  15. Beaver D.D. Reflections on scientific collaboration (and its study): past, present, and future. Scientometrics. 2001. 52(3): 365–377. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014254214337
  16. Milojevic S. Principles of scientific research team formation and evolution. PNAS. 2014. 111(11): 3984–3989. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1309723111
  17. Defining the role of authors and contributors. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html
  18. Web of Science Core Collection: Group Author field definition and indexing policy. https://support.clarivate.com/ScientificandAcademicResearch/s/article/Web-of-Science-Core-Collection-Group-Author-field-definition-and-indexing-policy?language=en_US
  19. Scientific institutions of NAS of Ukraine. http://www.nas.gov.ua/UA/Structure/Pages/default.aspx
  20. Hirsch J.E. An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. PNAS. 2005. 102(46): 16569–16572. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102
  21. Molinari J.F., Molinari A. A new methodology for ranking scientific institutions. Scientometrics. 2008. 75(1): 163–174. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1853-2
  22. Sypsa V., Hatzakis A. Assessing the impact of biomedical research in academic institutions of disparate sizes. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2009. 9(1): 33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-9-33
  23. Bibliometrics of Ukrainian science. Social Communications Research Center. http://www.nbuviap.gov.ua/bpnu/
  24. Ranking of universities according to Scopus 2019. Osvita.ua. http://osvita.ua/vnz/rating/64398/
  25. Merton R.K. The Thomas theorem and the Metthew effect. Social Forces. 1995. 74(2): 379–422. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2580486
  26. Bornmann L., Marx W. Thomas theorem in research evaluation. Scientometrics. 2020. 123: 553–555. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03389-6