scholarly journals Patterns of the Network of Cross-Border University Research Collaboration in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macau Greater Bay Area

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (17) ◽  
pp. 6846
Author(s):  
Jinyuan Ma ◽  
Fan Jiang ◽  
Liujian Gu ◽  
Xiang Zheng ◽  
Xiao Lin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Hong Kong ◽  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Citation Impact ◽  
High Quality ◽  
High Quality Research ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Bay Area ◽  
Research Areas ◽  
Industrial Distribution

This study analyzes the patterns of university co-authorship networks in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macau Greater Bay Area. It also examines the quality and subject distribution of co-authored articles within these networks. Social network analysis is used to outline the structure and evolution of the networks that have produced co-authored articles at universities in the Greater Bay Area from 2014 to 2018, at both regional and institutional levels. Field-weighted citation impact (FWCI) is used to analyze the quality and citation impact of co-authored articles in different subject fields. The findings of the study reveal that university co-authorship networks in the Greater Bay Area are still dispersed, and their disciplinary development is unbalanced. The study also finds that, while the research areas covered by high-quality co-authored articles fit the strategic needs of technological innovation and industrial distribution in the Greater Bay Area, high-quality research collaboration in the humanities and social sciences is insufficient.

scholarly journals Negating the Gender Citation Advantage in Political Science

2017 ◽  
Vol 50 (02) ◽  
pp. 448-455 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy L. Atchison
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Gender Bias ◽  
Academic Publishing ◽  
High Quality ◽  
High Quality Research ◽  
Quality Research ◽  
Male And Female ◽  
Research Areas ◽  
Considerable Research ◽  
Citation Advantage

ABSTRACTOpen-access (OA) advocates have long promoted OA as an egalitarian alternative to traditional subscription-based academic publishing. The argument is simple: OA gives everyone access to high-quality research at no cost. In turn, this should benefit individual researchers by increasing the number of people reading and citing academic articles. As the OA movement gains traction in the academy, scholars are investing considerable research energy to determine whether there is an OA citation advantage—that is, does OA increase an article’s citation counts? Research indicates that it does. Scholars also explored patterns of gender bias in academic publishing and found that women are cited at lower rates in many disciplines. Indeed, in many disciplines, men enjoy a significant and positive gender citation effect (GCE) compared to their female colleagues. This article combines these research areas to determine whether the OA citation advantage varies by gender. Using Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney (WMW) tests, the nonparametric analog to the independent samples T-test, I conclude that OA benefits male and female political scientists at similar rates. Thus, OA negates the gender citation advantage that typically accrues to male political scientists.

scholarly journals Editorial

Contention ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. v-vii
Author(s):  
Giovanni A. Travaglino ◽  
Benjamin Abrams
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Contentious Politics ◽  
Social Protest ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Scholarly Work ◽  
High Quality ◽  
High Quality Research ◽  
The Past ◽  
Scopus Database ◽  
Reference Index

Contention has now reached its eighth volume and fifteenth issue, and we have been delighted to see the journal move from attainment to attainment over the past eight years. Contention has developed a reputation for publishing high-quality research, articles, and analyses in the fields of social protest, collective action, and contentious politics, soliciting contributions from world-leading scholars and early career academics alike. Its articles are strongly interdisciplinary and global in nature, with the journal offering a platform for research that crosses old-fashioned national and theoretical boundaries. We were delighted to see such merits recognized by the recent inclusion of Contention in the SCOPUS database. Together with the European Reference Index for the Humanities and Social Sciences, where the journal is already indexed, the inclusion of Contention in SCOPUS will bring further visibility to the scholarly work we publish, facilitating its diffusion by providing an even stronger opportunity to contribute to international scholarly dialogue.

scholarly journals Chinese Universities’ Cross-Border Research Collaboration in the Social Sciences and Its Impact

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (18) ◽  
pp. 10378
Author(s):  
Yang Liu ◽  
Jinyuan Ma ◽  
Huanyu Song ◽  
Ziniu Qian ◽  
Xiao Lin
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Social Issues ◽  
Research Field ◽  
The Past ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Research Institution ◽  
The Social ◽  
Chinese Scholars ◽  
Four Levels

This paper examined the coauthorship patterns in Chinese researchers’ cross-border research collaboration in the social sciences based on articles and reviews indexed in the Scopus database (2010–2019). We explored the evolution of coauthorship patterns by year, research field, country/region, and research institution; additionally, the quality of the coauthored publications was examined using four levels of paper quality (Q1–4), citations per paper, and FWCI. We found that collaboration between Chinese and international scholars is very common, and more than 40% of all papers published by Chinese scholars from 2010 to 2019 involved cross-border collaboration. The growth in collaboration was very steady over the past 10 years, increasing by an average of 41% per year. United States scholars are the most common research collaboration partners for Chinese scholars in the social sciences, followed by those in Hong Kong, the United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada. The field of psychology seeks the most collaboration, followed by economics and finance, business and management, and social issues. The percentage of Q1 papers increased from 36% in 2010 to 66% in 2019. Thus, in the past 10 years, Chinese scholars’ cross-border collaboration has grown extensively in terms of both quantity and impact.

scholarly journals Hong Kong (in China) studies: Hong Kong popular culture as example

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 109-123
Author(s):  
Yiu-Wai Chu
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Popular Culture ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Bay Area ◽  
Economic Partnership Agreement ◽  
China Studies ◽  
Economic Partnership ◽  
Partnership Agreement ◽  
The City

“China has become a predicament as well as a condition for Hong Kong culture” in the age of China, especially after the signing of the Closer Economic Partnership Agreement in 2003. This has become even more acute for Hong Kong culture in the integration of the Greater Bay Area, which can be seen as incorporating Hong Kong and Macao’s development into the overall development of the country. At this particular juncture, the issue of integration with the Mainland has become a topic that is of utmost importance for any consideration of the future of Hong Kong culture and the city as a whole. In this special context, the transmission of Hong Kong popular cultures in the Mainland are related topics that need to be explored. For example, what are the implications behind the success of Hong Kong directors and producers who took the helm of immensely popular Mainland television series? After Cantopop crossed the border, to what extent did the singers and the songs that they sang in Mainland music reality shows represent Hong Kong? These would be very good case studies of Hong Kong culture in cross-border ventures, and studying their transmissions would have long-term implications for not only Hong Kong culture in particular but also Hong Kong Studies in general. This essay endeavors to use these cross-border experiences as examples to offer a prolegomenon to Hong Kong (in China) Studies, which will in turn contribute to the possibility of generating a cultural studies response to the new configuration of the Greater Bay Area.

Problems and countermeasures of cross-border medical insurance development in Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao greater bay area

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-38
Author(s):  
Xiating Cai ◽  
Yuxuan Cui ◽  
Ziming Xie ◽  
Jiaxin Zhong ◽  
Xihuang Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Medical Insurance ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Bay Area ◽  
Insurance Development

scholarly journals The Nordic Thematic Group for Innovative and Resilient Regions 2017–2020 - final report

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jukka Teräs ◽  
◽  
Anna Berlina ◽  
Mari Wøien Meijer
Keyword(s):  
Nordic Countries ◽  
Final Report ◽  
Sustainable Cities ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Sustainable Rural Development ◽  
High Quality Research ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Nordic Council ◽  
Smart Specialisation ◽  
Council Of Ministers

The Nordic thematic group for innovative and resilient regions 2017–2020 (TG2) was established by the Nordic Council of Ministers and is a part of the Nordic Co-operation Programme for Regional Development and Planning 2017–2020. Three Nordicthematic groups were established for the four-year period: Innovative and resilient regions, Sustainable rural development, and Sustainable cities and urban development. The thematic groups have been organised under the Nordic Council of Ministers’ Committee of Civil Servants for Regional Affairs, and Nordregio has acted as the secretariat for the thematic groups. This report summarises the work and results of the Nordic thematic group for innovative and resilient regions (TG2) in 2017–2020. The thematic group has not only produced high-quality research on innovative and resilient regions in the Nordic countries but also contributed to public policy with the latest knowledge on the creation and development of innovative and resilient regions across the nordic countries, with focus on smart specialisation, digitalisation, regional resilience, and skills policies. TG2 has also contributed to research on innovative and resilient regions in the Nordic cross-border context.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document