-
Zhang, C.; Bu, Y.; Ding, Y.; Xu, J.: Understanding scientific collaboration : homophily, transitivity, and preferential attachment (2018)
0.03
0.027922278 = sum of:
0.025843486 = product of:
0.103373945 = sum of:
0.103373945 = weight(_text_:authors in 4011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.103373945 = score(doc=4011,freq=4.0), product of:
0.2418733 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.42738882 = fieldWeight in 4011, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4011)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.0020787928 = product of:
0.0041575856 = sum of:
0.0041575856 = weight(_text_:s in 4011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0041575856 = score(doc=4011,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 4011, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4011)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Scientific collaboration is essential in solving problems and breeding innovation. Coauthor network analysis has been utilized to study scholars' collaborations for a long time, but these studies have not simultaneously taken different collaboration features into consideration. In this paper, we present a systematic approach to analyze the differences in possibilities that two authors will cooperate as seen from the effects of homophily, transitivity, and preferential attachment. Exponential random graph models (ERGMs) are applied in this research. We find that different types of publications one author has written play diverse roles in his/her collaborations. An author's tendency to form new collaborations with her/his coauthors' collaborators is strong, where the more coauthors one author had before, the more new collaborators he/she will attract. We demonstrate that considering the authors' attributes and homophily effects as well as the transitivity and preferential attachment effects of the coauthorship network in which they are embedded helps us gain a comprehensive understanding of scientific collaboration.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 69(2018) no.1, S.72-86
-
Lu, C.; Bu, Y.; Wang, J.; Ding, Y.; Torvik, V.; Schnaars, M.; Zhang, C.: Examining scientific writing styles from the perspective of linguistic complexity : a cross-level moderation model (2019)
0.02
0.020352896 = sum of:
0.018274104 = product of:
0.07309642 = sum of:
0.07309642 = weight(_text_:authors in 5219) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07309642 = score(doc=5219,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2418733 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 5219, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5219)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.0020787928 = product of:
0.0041575856 = sum of:
0.0041575856 = weight(_text_:s in 5219) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0041575856 = score(doc=5219,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 5219, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5219)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Publishing articles in high-impact English journals is difficult for scholars around the world, especially for non-native English-speaking scholars (NNESs), most of whom struggle with proficiency in English. To uncover the differences in English scientific writing between native English-speaking scholars (NESs) and NNESs, we collected a large-scale data set containing more than 150,000 full-text articles published in PLoS between 2006 and 2015. We divided these articles into three groups according to the ethnic backgrounds of the first and corresponding authors, obtained by Ethnea, and examined the scientific writing styles in English from a two-fold perspective of linguistic complexity: (a) syntactic complexity, including measurements of sentence length and sentence complexity; and (b) lexical complexity, including measurements of lexical diversity, lexical density, and lexical sophistication. The observations suggest marginal differences between groups in syntactical and lexical complexity.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 70(2019) no.5, S.462-475
-
Lu, C.; Zhang, Y.; Ahn, Y.-Y.; Ding, Y.; Zhang, C.; Ma, D.: Co-contributorship network and division of labor in individual scientific collaborations (2020)
0.02
0.016960748 = sum of:
0.01522842 = product of:
0.06091368 = sum of:
0.06091368 = weight(_text_:authors in 5963) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06091368 = score(doc=5963,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2418733 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.25184128 = fieldWeight in 5963, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5963)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.0017323275 = product of:
0.003464655 = sum of:
0.003464655 = weight(_text_:s in 5963) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003464655 = score(doc=5963,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 5963, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5963)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Collaborations are pervasive in current science. Collaborations have been studied and encouraged in many disciplines. However, little is known about how a team really functions from the detailed division of labor within. In this research, we investigate the patterns of scientific collaboration and division of labor within individual scholarly articles by analyzing their co-contributorship networks. Co-contributorship networks are constructed by performing the one-mode projection of the author-task bipartite networks obtained from 138,787 articles published in PLoS journals. Given an article, we define 3 types of contributors: Specialists, Team-players, and Versatiles. Specialists are those who contribute to all their tasks alone; team-players are those who contribute to every task with other collaborators; and versatiles are those who do both. We find that team-players are the majority and they tend to contribute to the 5 most common tasks as expected, such as "data analysis" and "performing experiments." The specialists and versatiles are more prevalent than expected by our designed 2 null models. Versatiles tend to be senior authors associated with funding and supervision. Specialists are associated with 2 contrasting roles: the supervising role as team leaders or marginal and specialized contributors.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71(2020) no.10, S.1162-1178
-
Hu, B.; Dong, X.; Zhang, C.; Bowman, T.D.; Ding, Y.; Milojevic, S.; Ni, C.; Yan, E.; Larivière, V.: ¬A lead-lag analysis of the topic evolution patterns for preprints and publications (2015)
0.00
0.0014699287 = product of:
0.0029398573 = sum of:
0.0029398573 = product of:
0.0058797146 = sum of:
0.0058797146 = weight(_text_:s in 2337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0058797146 = score(doc=2337,freq=4.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.101928525 = fieldWeight in 2337, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2337)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.12, S.2643-2656
-
Xu, H.; Bu, Y.; Liu, M.; Zhang, C.; Sun, M.; Zhang, Y.; Meyer, E.; Salas, E.; Ding, Y.: Team power dynamics and team impact : new perspectives on scientific collaboration using career age as a proxy for team power (2022)
0.00
8.6616375E-4 = product of:
0.0017323275 = sum of:
0.0017323275 = product of:
0.003464655 = sum of:
0.003464655 = weight(_text_:s in 663) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003464655 = score(doc=663,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 663, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=663)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.10, S.1489-1505
