Folie 1

1
Wissenschaftliche Kooperationsprozesse unter
bibliometrischen und sozialpsychologischen
Gesichtpunkten Hildrun Kretschmer PD, Dr. sc.
phil. Dr. oec., Dipl.-psych. Institut für
Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft,
HU Special Engaged Professor, Dalian University
of Technology, China WISELAB of the Dalian
University of Technology (Director together with
Liu Zeyuan) WISELAB Webometrics, Informetrics,
Scientometrics, Econometrics Laboratory
2
Email kretschmer.h_at_onlinehome.de Web site
http//www.h-kretschmer.de She has studied
psychology and received both her doctorate Dr.
oec. and her doctorate Dr.sc.phil. She is
private lecturer (PD) since 1996. Her work deals
with collaboration processes in science from the
viewpoints of bibliometrics and socio-psychology,
modelling of collaboration systems and theory,
development and change of dynamic social
structures in science. She was a member of the
EU funded WISER project on web indicators for
science, technology and innovation research from
2002-2005. She is appointed as Associate Editor
of both the international journal Scientometrics
and the Journal of Information Management and
Scientometrics.
3
Currently, she is co-ordinating the Global
Interdisciplinary Research Network COLLNET
"Collaboration in Science and in Technology", Web
site http//www.collnet.de. She is editor of
10 conference proceedings and she has published
more than 70 peer reviewed articles or
contributions in national and international
journals or monographs, several non-peer reviewed
publications. She was working as organizer or
program chair of 10 international conferences or
workshops in the area of webometrics,
scientometrics and informetrics, collaboration in
science and in technology.
4

Abstract Bibliometric and webometric methods of
collaboration network analyses are presented
including gender studies. A theoretical approach
of the development of collaboration patterns are
discussed from the psychological or sociological
point of view Who is collaborating with whom?

1
5
(No Transcript)
6
(No Transcript)
7
(No Transcript)
8
(No Transcript)
9
The rise in collaboration in science and
technology experienced world-wide at national and
international level, has assumed such an
overriding importance that there is now an urgent
need perceptible to study such processes with a
view to acquiring fundamental knowledge for
organizing future research and its application to
science and technology policies. Foundation of
COLLNET (www.collnet.de) Therefore in the year
2000 the time had come in the meantime to create
a global interdisciplinary research network
COLLNET on the topic "Collaboration in Science
and in Technology" with 64 members from 20
countries of all continents.
10
Collaboration until 1997 Collaboration
until 1999 Collaboration until 2001
Collaboration until 2003.
11
0. Foundation and Development of COLLNET 1.
Introduction 1.1. From Librametry to
Webometrics 1.2. Reflections on scientific
collaboration (and its study) past, present,
and future 1.3. Analyzing scientific networks
through co-authorship 1.4. Patterns of scientific
collaboration
12
2. Theory in Psychology/Sociology of
Science 2.1. Social stratification of authors
revealed from the coauthorship network 2.2. A
contribution to the dispute on the Ortega
hypothesis Connection between publication rate
and stratification of scientists, tested by
various methods 2.3. Coauthorship networks of
invisible colleges and institutionalized
communities 2.4. Measurement of social
stratification, a contribution to the dispute on
the Ortega Hypothesis 2.5. Birds of a feather
flock together The four step way from proverb
to measurement
13
2.6. Author Inflation Leads to a Breakdown of
Lotkas Law 2.7. Development of structures in
coauthorship networks 2.8. Similarities and
dissimilarities in coauthorship networks.
Gestalt theory as explanation for well-ordered
collaboration structures and production of
scientific literature 2.9. Distribution of
Co-Author Couples in Journals Continuation of
Lotkas Law on the 3rd Dimension 2.10.
Chinese-Indian-German collaboration results that
provided the impetus for the foundation of
COLLNET
14
3. Collaboration networks (Bibliographic and Web
networks) 3.1. Author productivity and Erdös
distances in co-authorship and in web link
networks 3.2. Visibility of Collaboration on the
Web 3.3. Reflection of Co-authorship Networks in
the Web Web Hyperlinks versus Web Visibility
Rates 3.4. A New Centrality Measure for Social
Network Analysis Applicable to Bibliometric and
Webometric Data
15
4. Gender Studies and Collaboration 4.1. The
Role of Chinese women in science and technology
development based on statistical data 4.2. Web
links and gender in science An exploratory
analysis 4.3. G e n d e r s t u d i e s a n d
i n d i c a t o r s i n t h e w e b 4.4.
Visibility of collaboration between immunology
institutions on the web including aspects of
gender studies
16
1. Introduction 1. 1. From Librametry to
Webometrics by Kretschmer Thelwall The
development of information and library sciences
together with science studies will, among other
things, be fashioned by the development of
quantitative studies conducted in this field. The
terminology thus obtained shall be perceived as a
reflection of the technical, social and political
backgrounds of the researchers. The technical
redevelopment of methods of communication through
the Internet presents a challenge for information
scientists to cultivate novel quantitative
methods and techniques in order to measure rates
of information exchange in this new medium.
17
1. 2. Reflections on scientific collaboration
(and its study) past, present, and future by
Donald deB. Beaver Personal observations and
reflections on scientific collaboration and its
study, past, present, and future, containing new
material on motives for collaboration, and on
some of its salient features. Continuing
methodological problems are singled out, together
with suggestions for future research.
18
1.3. Analyzing scientific networks through
co- authorship by Glänzel and Schubert Co-autho
rship is one of the most tangible and well
documented forms of scientific collaboration.
Almost every aspect of scientific collaboration
networks can be reliably tracked by analyzing
co-authorship networks by bibliometric methods.
In the present study, scientific collaboration is
considered both at individual and national
levels, with special focus given to multinational
collaborations. Both literature data and original
results witnessed a dramatic quantitative and
structural change in the last decades of the 20th
century. The changes, to great extent, can be
attributed to the universal tendencies of
globalisation and the political restructuring of
Europe. The standards and, particularly, the
visibility of scientific research, as a rule,
benefit from the ever increasing level of
collaboration, but the profits do not come
automatically. This fact underlines the necessity
of a regular quantitative monitoring of inputs
and outcomes, i.e., bibliometric surveys.
19
1. 4. Patterns of scientific collaboration by
Yamashita Okubo The objective of the research
is to analyze international cooperation by use of
a new indicator, Probabilistic Partnership Index
(PPI). The authors investigate inter-sectoral
cooperation between France and Japan for the
period of 1981-2004, by classifying every
research institution appeared in the data set
into sectors. The authors examine international
collaborative patterns of the two countries and
investigate domestic collaborative patterns and
multi-lateral relationships established within
the French-Japanese cooperation.
20
2. Theory in Psychology/Sociology of
Science 2.1. Social stratification of authors
revealed from the coauthorship network by
Kretschmer Seven bibliographies from the fields
of medicine, physics and social sciences were
used. The authors were classified by groups in
accordance with the number of publications per
author. Studies were made to determine the
statistically expected number of coauthorships by
proceeding from assuming an independence of
coauthorship between authors from the number of
their publications.
21
Hypothesis The proportion of the sum of
coauthorship found between authors with the same
number of publications to the sum of the
statistically expected one is larger than the
proportion of the sum of coauthorships found
between authors with a different number of
publications to the sum of the statistically
expected one. This hypothesis could be verified
in all seven bibliographies. Coauthorships
between authors do not come into being
independently of the number of their
publications, i.e. of their social ranks.
22
2.2. A contribution to the dispute on the Ortega
hypothesis Connection between publication rate
and stratification of scientists, tested by
various methods by Kretschmer Müller It was
tested whether the publication rate of scientists
as a rough measure of their "eminence",
influences their stratification. The
stratification is reflected in cooperation, in
co-authorships, in the structure of the citations
and in the distribution of publications among the
various problem areas of a scientific discipline.
The findings of these investigations was
discussed as a contribution to the dispute among
authors who accept or reject the Ortega
hypothesis which states that the research done by
average scientists substantially contributes to
the advance of science.
23
2.3. Coauthorship networks of invisible colleges
and institutionalized communities by
Kretschmer In invisible colleges the relative
frequency of coauthorships is higher between
scientists with the same number of publications
than between authors of different ones. The
opposite is valid in institutionalized
communities.
24
2.4. Measurement of social stratification, a
contribution to the dispute on the Ortega
Hypothesis by Kretschmer The extent of
stratification decreases with increasing number
of coauthors per paper
25
2.5. Birds of a feather flock together The four
step way from proverb to measurement The
influence of scientific productivity on
collaboration structure in invisible colleges can
be proved with increasing precision over several
steps.
26
2.6. Author Inflation Leads to a Breakdown of
Lotkas Law by Kretschmer Rousseau It is
empirically shown that, even using the normal or
total counting procedure, Lotkas law breaks down
when articles with a large, i.e. more than
hundred, number of authors are included in the
bibliography.
27
2.7. Development of structures in coauthorship
networks by Kretschmer A new science,
interdisciplinary by nature, has recently
emerged. It is concerned with the study of
complex systems and the analysis into their
underlying structures that are, invariably,
derived from physical, chemical, biological or
social systems. In the course of the last three
centuries the scientists' community has been
perceived as a non-linear dynamic
system. Self-organization, growth and instability
have provided the source for developmental
processes of a system of an arbitrary type.
Therefore, in describing the structural
development in scientists' communities, the
studies are predicated on analogies apparent in
the development of other systems, e.g. the
organism of an individual, such as a man, or such
superorganisms as the state of termites, the
ants or the honey-bees.
28
2.8. Similarities and dissimilarities in
coauthorship networks. Gestalt theory as
explanation for well-ordered collaboration
structures and production of scientific
literature by Kretschmer Based on Gestalt
theory the existence of a field-force equilibrium
is assumed for explanation how according to the
conciseness principle mathematically precise
gestalts could exist in coauthorship networks. A
simple mathematical function is developed for the
description of these gestalts which can
encompass complementary tendencies (as metapher
the principle of Yin and Yang) in their dynamic
interplay and thus, can reflect the change in
gestalts. For example Birds of a feather flock
together and Opposites attract are explained
as complementary tendencies.
29
2.9. Distribution of Co-Author Couples in
Journals Continuation of Lotkas Law on the
3rd Dimension by Kretschmer Lotkas law states
that scientists will be counted who have i
publications included in the bibliography. In
the present paper couples of scientists will be
counted under the condition of both the first
scientists count who have i publications, and the
second scientists count who have j publications
included in the bibliography. The following
question arises Is there any regularity for the
distribution of co-author couples in journals?
30
2.10. Chinese-Indian-German collaboration results
that provided the impetus for the foundation of
COLLNET by Kretschmer, Liang Kundra The
collaboration model of Kretschmer was applied to
the co-authorship network of Indian medicine with
the aim of being able to observe changes in
structure over a period of 30 years. The idea of
Liang, on her Distribution of major Scientific
and Cultural Achievements in Terms of Age was
put in relation to the collaboration model of
Kretschmer.
31
3. Collaboration networks (Bibliographic and Web
networks) 3.1. Author productivity and Erdös
distances in co- authorship and in web link
networks by Kretschmer The increasing
scientific-political importance of cooperation in
science requires the application of new methods
of analysis of social networks in co-authorship
and in Web link networks. In this context, some
interesting papers on "Erdös Number" which gives
the shortest way (topological distance) between
an author and the well-known Hungarian
mathematician Erdös in co-authorship network have
been published recently. A few new queries which
particularly concern the position of highly
productive authors in the network were developed
in the present paper.
32
Thus, a relationship of distribution of these
authors among the clusters in the co-authorship
network could be proved in dependence on the size
of these clusters. Highly productive authors
have on an average low Erdös Numbers and thus
shorter distances to all the other authors of a
special field than low productive authors whereby
the influencing possibility of highly productive
scientists gets expressed among others in the
development of this special field. A theory on
the stratification in science with respect to the
over random similarity of the scientists who are
collaborating with one another which could be
covered with other empirical methods before could
also be confirmed on application of the Erdös
Numbers. The application of the new developed
queries also on the web links between homepages
of authors is proposed for studies in future. It
has to be studied if co-authorship and web link
networks have similar structures or not regarding
the author productivity and Erdös Distances.
33
3.2 Visibility of Collaboration on the Web by
Kretschmer Aguillo The emerging influence of
new information and communication technologies
(ICT) on collaboration in science and technology
has to be considered. In particular, the question
of the extent to which collaboration in science
and in technology is visible on the Web needs
examining. Thus the purpose of this study is to
examine whether broadly similar results would
occur if solely Web data was used rather than all
available bibliometric co-authorship data.
For this purpose a new approach of Web
visibility indicators of collaboration is
examined. The ensemble of COLLNET members is used
to compare - co-authorship patterns in
traditional bibliometric databases - and the
network visible on the Web.
34
3.3 Reflection of Co-authorship Networks in the
Web Web Hyperlinks versus Web Visibility Rates
by Kretschmer, Kretschmer Kretschmer About ten
years ago a new research field called
webometrics emerged. Similarities between
methods used in webometrics and scientometrics or
informetrics are evident from the literature.
Are there also similarities between
scientometric and Web indicators of collaboration
for possible use and technology policy making?
35
Usually, the bibliometric method used to study
collaboration is the investigation of
co-authorships. In this paper, Web hyperlinks
and Web visibility indicators are examined to
establish their usefulness as Web indicators of
collaboration to find out if similarities exist
between Web based structures and bibliographic
based structures. Three empirical studies of
collaboration between institutions or individual
scientists have shown that Web hyperlink
structures dont reflect collaboration structures
collected by co-authorship data. However Web
visibility indicators of collaboration are
different from hyperlinks because they can be
successfully used as Web indicators of
collaboration.
36
3.4. A New Centrality Measure for Social Network
Analysis Applicable to Bibliometric and
Webometric Data by Hildrun and Theo
Kretschmer Abstract In the literature there are
a large number of publications in sociology, in
computer science or in information sciences, as
well as in studies of collaboration in science
describing the studies of social networks with
unweighted ties because measures involving
unweighted ties are easier to calculate. It is
not surprising that there are few studies on
networks with weighted ties since they not only
need more complex formulas but need a process of
quantification when quantitative empirical data
are not directly available.
37
However quantitative empirical data are directly
available under the condition of using
bibliometric or webometric data. In conclusion
new complex measures of the degree centrality are
introduced including weighted ties possible for
use of the analysis of co-authorship or citation
networks. Both co-authorship relations and
citations are well quantified data (weighted
ties). These new measures are applied to a
co-authorship network as an example.
38
4.Gender Studies and Collaboration 4.1. The role
of Chinese women in science and technology
development based on statistical data by Wang
Yan, Wu Yishan, Zhao Lixin Mao Zhedong, former
Chairman of China, had a famous wisdom Women
can hold up half the sky. It influenced a lot of
people in China, including both women and men.
Women play more and more important role in the
development of China, and more and more people
care about the issue about gender equality.
However, have Chinese women played a role they
ought to and could to? Have they gained the equal
position as men? There are still many questions
to answer. We want to discuss the role of Chinese
women in science and technology development. We
just want to investigate the phenomena reflected
by statistical data and try to find some problem,
because many researchers have done a lot of work
to discuss the cause of these phenomena.
39
4.2. Web links and gender in science An
exploratory analysis by Thelwall, Barjak
Kretschmer Gender inequalities are prevalent in
science despite many initiatives to try to
eradicate them. Given the deep-rooted and complex
nature of these inequalities there is a
continuing need for research into their causes
and manifestations. This study analyses one
aspect of web communication, hyperlinks, to
explore whether they are a potential source of
insights into gender differences in this
important scientific communication medium. A
study of links to life sciences research groups
in nine European found little evidence of gender
differences, except in Germany. As a consequence,
it is argued that hyperlinks are not a promising
source of quantitative information about gender
differences in communication strategies or online
visibility, at least for senior researchers or
research groups.
40
4.3. G e n d e r S t u d i e s a n d I n d i
c a t o r s i n t h e W e b by Kretschmer
Aguillo New indicators for gender studies in
the Web are introduced and tested in a pilot
study of 223 multi-authored publications in a set
of 64 COLLNET members. COLLNET is a global
interdisciplinary research network under the
title Collaboration in Science and in
Technology with 64 members from 20 countries.
Studies are presented on the one hand with the
focus - on the set of multi-authored
publications and on the other with the focus
- on the set of authors (Social network
analysis).
41
Indicators for gender studies under both
conditions are introduced here - Bibliometric
and Web indicators of gender co-operation - Web
visibility rates and - Indicators of gender
centrality in bibliographic and in Web networks
42
4.4. Visibility of collaboration between
immunology institutions on the web including
aspects of gender studies by Kretschmer,
Kretschmer Kretschmer A number of studies can
be found in the literature about analyzing
scientific collaboration networks through
co-authorship but very few have examined the
reflection of these networks on the Web. In this
paper the collaboration between 80 German
institutions of immunology is analyzed, including
gender collaboration. The percentage of
co-authored papers visible on the Web increased
from 1997 to 2002. In this connection the
visualized Web network in 2002 is slightly more
similar to the bibliographic co-authorship
network than in 1997.
43
Highly productive institutions have a higher
central position in both collaboration networks
and consequently greater influence on the entire
scientific community than the lower productive
institutions. The contribution of female members
of the German Society of Immunology in both the
bibliographic and Web networks is very low in
relation to the male counterparts. That
corresponds with general results of a large
gender study conducted by the European Commission.