Measuring Co-Authorship and Networking-Adjusted Scientific Impact

@article{citeulike:3043819, abstract = {Appraisal of the scientific impact of researchers, teams and institutions with productivity and citation metrics has major repercussions. Funding and promotion of individuals and survival of teams and institutions depend on publications and citations. In this competitive environment, the number of authors per paper is increasing and apparently some co-authors don't satisfy authorship criteria. Listing of individual contributions is still sporadic and also open to manipulation. Metrics are needed to measure the networking intensity for a single scientist or group of scientists accounting for patterns of co-authorship. Here, I define I1 for a single scientist as the number of authors who appear in at least I1 papers of the specific scientist. For a group of scientists or institution, In is defined as the number of authors who appear in at least In papers that bear the affiliation of the group or institution. I1 depends on the number of papers authored Np. The power exponent R of the relationship between I1 and Np categorizes scientists as solitary (R>2.5), nuclear (R = 2.25–2.5), networked (R = 2–2.25), extensively networked (R = 1.75–2) or collaborators (R<1.75). R may be used to adjust for co-authorship networking the citation impact of a scientist. In similarly provides a simple measure of the effective networking size to adjust the citation impact of groups or institutions. Empirical data are provided for single scientists and institutions for the proposed metrics. Cautious adoption of adjustments for co-authorship and networking in scientific appraisals may offer incentives for more accountable co-authorship behaviour in published articles.}, author = {Ioannidis, John P. }, citeulike-article-id = {3043819}, doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0002778}, journal = {PLoS ONE}, keywords = {co-authorship, coauthorship, impact, network}, month = {July}, number = {7}, pages = {e2778+}, posted-at = {2008-07-25 22:35:58}, priority = {2}, publisher = {Public Library of Science}, title = {Measuring Co-Authorship and Networking-Adjusted Scientific Impact}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0002778}, volume = {3}, year = {2008} }

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:3043819 L3 - citeulike-article-id:3043819 TI - Measuring Co-Authorship and Networking-Adjusted Scientific Impact JF - PLoS ONE VL - 3 IS - 7 SP - e2778 PB - Public Library of Science N2 - Appraisal of the scientific impact of researchers, teams and institutions with productivity and citation metrics has major repercussions. Funding and promotion of individuals and survival of teams and institutions depend on publications and citations. In this competitive environment, the number of authors per paper is increasing and apparently some co-authors don't satisfy authorship criteria. Listing of individual contributions is still sporadic and also open to manipulation. Metrics are needed to measure the networking intensity for a single scientist or group of scientists accounting for patterns of co-authorship. Here, I define I1 for a single scientist as the number of authors who appear in at least I1 papers of the specific scientist. For a group of scientists or institution, In is defined as the number of authors who appear in at least In papers that bear the affiliation of the group or institution. I1 depends on the number of papers authored Np. The power exponent R of the relationship between I1 and Np categorizes scientists as solitary (R>2.5), nuclear (R = 2.25–2.5), networked (R = 2–2.25), extensively networked (R = 1.75–2) or collaborators (R<1.75). R may be used to adjust for co-authorship networking the citation impact of a scientist. In similarly provides a simple measure of the effective networking size to adjust the citation impact of groups or institutions. Empirical data are provided for single scientists and institutions for the proposed metrics. Cautious adoption of adjustments for co-authorship and networking in scientific appraisals may offer incentives for more accountable co-authorship behaviour in published articles. KW - co-authorship KW - coauthorship KW - impact KW - network AU - Ioannidis, John PY - 2008/07/23/ UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0002778 ER -