The Design of Scientific Research Collaboration System Based on Web

2012 ◽  
pp. 489-496
Author(s):  
Huizhong Xie ◽  
Lingling Si ◽  
Dejun Qiao
Keyword(s):  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Scientific Research

scholarly journals Influence of Scientific Collaboration Network on Academic Performance

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (12) ◽  
pp. 68
Author(s):  
Xiangjin Xiao ◽  
Manoch Prompanyo
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Collaboration ◽  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Empirical Test ◽  
Research Performance ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Collaboration Network ◽  
Network Centrality ◽  
Network Stability ◽  
Scientific Performance ◽  
The Relationship

Collaboration in science is a complex phenomenon that affects scientific performance in various ways. Thus, understanding the influences of the research collaboration network is important for researchers. This paper explores the relationship between research collaboration network structural and scientific research performance and conducts an empirical test with data from 416 scholars. Findings revealed that network stability reduces the scholars' research performance, and network centrality promotes research performance. The network structural holes that the scholar spans, moderate the detrimental effects of network stability. This research provides suggestions for scholars to build a reasonable scientific research collaboration network to improve their research performance.

Scientific Collaborative Research with Māori Communities: Kaupapa or Kūpapa Māori?

2007 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 60-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annabel Ahuriri-Driscoll ◽  
Maui Hudson ◽  
Jeff Foote ◽  
Maria Hepi ◽  
Marara Rogers-Koroheke ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Ethics Committees ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Research Project ◽  
Track Record ◽  
Kaupapa Māori ◽  
Research Excellence ◽  
Conducting Research

The phrase ‘for Māori, by Māori, with Māori’, synonymous with Kaupapa Māori research, reflects the strong community participatory orientation and aims of this paradigm. Its use has evolved from glib reference and catchphrase, to a ‘checklist'/gauge of how well a research project has enacted community participatory principles, and to what extent Māori participation in the research process is meaningful and empowered. Description of research according to this ‘shorthand’ definition, however, can be misleading. This paper will discuss two models of collaborative scientific research, conducted at the Institute of Environmental Health and Research (ESR) in association with Māori communities, ‘for, by and with Māori’. However, Te Riu o Hokianga and the Rakaipaaka Health and Ancestry Study occupy opposite ends of the shared partnership – researcher-led spectrum, and differ quite significantly in their orientation, application of Māori research principles, and approach to achievement of their objectives. If the ‘for, by and with’ mantra does not in itself sufficiently guarantee alignment with Kaupapa Māori principles, what other mechanisms exist to ensure that this is so? Is articulating the degree of Māori responsiveness for funding and ethics proposals adequate? Where these judgements are largely subjective, who decides when a research project ‘measures up’: Kaupapa Māori researchers, participating Māori communities, funders, or perhaps ethics committees? The importance of Māori-focused innovation, development and advancement in research has been indicated within Vote RS&T policy and incorporated into funding/investment opportunities within an existing framework that values research excellence and a track record. Ensuring that research excellence as defined and purchased translates into excellence in practice is one issue. A further and equally important issue is whether the measures and means of achieving excellence therein translate into excellence for research practice with Māori communities. In the context of conducting research with Māori within a Crown Research Institute, a third issue emerges: that of the alignment (or not) of science excellence indicators and outcomes with those of Māori research excellence. With reference to two examples of science research collaboration with Māori communities, these three key issues will be considered, with inference for Māori research excellence and future directions in collaborative scientific research.

Collaborative Production in Science: An Empirical Analysis of Coauthorships in Economics

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-45
Author(s):  
Katharine A. Anderson ◽  
Seth Richards-Shubik
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Analysis ◽  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Network Formation ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Research Teams ◽  
Communication And Coordination

Abstract This paper studies productivity and preferences in scientific research. Collaboration is increasingly important for innovation in science, and other domains, but we have limited understanding of the factors researchers use to choose their collaborators and the projects they work on. Here, we use a model of strategic network formation and a recently developed econometric method to examine this question in the context of economics researchers. We learn that research teams with more collaborators tend to produce papers with higher impact, without increasing individual costs of communication and coordination. This suggests the trend toward larger research teams in economics will continue.

scholarly journals Fuel-Cell Electric Vehicles: Plotting a Scientific and Technological Knowledge Map

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
pp. 2334
Author(s):  
Izaskun Alvarez-Meaza ◽  
Enara Zarrabeitia-Bilbao ◽  
Rosa Maria Rio-Belver ◽  
Gaizka Garechana-Anacabe
Keyword(s):  
Fuel Cell ◽  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Technological Development ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Road Transport ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Knowledge Map ◽  
Hydrogen Energy

The fuel-cell electric vehicle (FCEV) has been defined as a promising way to avoid road transport greenhouse emissions, but nowadays, they are not commercially available. However, few studies have attempted to monitor the global scientific research and technological profile of FCEVs. For this reason, scientific research and technological development in the field of FCEV from 1999 to 2019 have been researched using bibliometric and patent data analysis, including network analysis. Based on reports, the current status indicates that FCEV research topics have reached maturity. In addition, the analysis reveals other important findings: (1) The USA is the most productive in science and patent jurisdiction; (2) both Chinese universities and their authors are the most productive in science; however, technological development is led by Japanese car manufacturers; (3) in scientific research, collaboration is located within the tri-polar world (North America–Europe–Asia-Pacific); nonetheless, technological development is isolated to collaborations between companies of the same automotive group; (4) science is currently directing its efforts towards hydrogen production and storage, energy management systems related to battery and hydrogen energy, Life Cycle Assessment, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The technological development focuses on technologies related to electrically propelled vehicles; (5) the International Journal of Hydrogen Energy and SAE Technical Papers are the two most important sources of knowledge diffusion. This study concludes by outlining the knowledge map and directions for further research.

Relationships and Tasks in Scientific Research Collaboration

1988 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert E. Kraut ◽  
Jolene Galegher ◽  
Carmen Egido
Keyword(s):  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Scientific Research
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document