The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0737-8831.htm
International scientific collaboration among Iranian researchers during 1998-2007 Zouhayr Hayati and Fereshteh Didegah LIS Department, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran Abstract
International scientific collaboration 433 Received 23 February 2010 Revised 6 April 2010 Accepted 15 June 2010
Purpose – The paper aims to investigate the rate of Iranian researchers collaboration with their colleagues in other countries in science citation index (SCI). In addition, it seeks to investigate the visibility of publications by Iranian researchers, and particularly the visibility of papers resulting from international collaboration. Design/methodology/approach – The paper employs the survey research method to answer research questions. Any publication recorded in the SCI database from 1998 to 2007 with at least one Iranian author was recognized and transferred to a database in Excel. The total records were 33,813. This number mostly includes articles, letters, notes, and reviews. Findings – The results showed that Iranian researchers have had scientific collaboration with 115 countries, and that their numbers have increased between 1998 and 2007. The results also showed that the number of domestic articles per year was 2-3.5 times more than international ones. Investigating international collaboration in different subject areas revealed that geosciences had the biggest number of publications co-authored internationally. Iran’s main partners were the USA, Canada, and UK, respectively. European researchers were the main counterparts of Iranian researchers. In addition, Iranian researchers had mostly co-published with their colleagues in advanced countries. Among Iranian universities and research institutions, the University of Tehran had the highest collaboration at the international level. The results revealed that the average number of citations received by international co-authored publications was more than those received by domestic co-authored publications. Originality/value – The paper shows the situation of international collaboration among Iranian researchers and the impact of publications resulting from international collaboration. Keywords International cooperation, Iran, Referencing, Research, Qualitative research Paper type Research paper
Introduction There has been increased interest in participation in international scientific collaboration networks in recent years. Scientific collaboration is one means of advancing research and enhancing publication capacity (Pao, 1992). Collaboration can be beneficial for several reasons: it provides a large pool of available ideas, methods, and resources, and it allows cost sharing and time saving as a result of division of labor (Avkiran, 1997; Katz and Martin, 1997). Collaboration is often a critical aspect of scientific research, which is dominated by complex problems, rapidly changing technology, dynamic growth of knowledge, and highly specialized areas of expertise. An individual scientist can seldom provide all of the expertise and resources necessary to address complex research problems. Nowadays, it is more common for scientists to conduct research in collaboration with their colleagues in different institutions, countries, or disciplines. In recent decades, international scientific collaboration has greatly intensified (Gla¨nzel et al., 1999),
Library Hi Tech Vol. 28 No. 3, 2010 pp. 433-446 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0737-8831 DOI 10.1108/07378831011076675
LHT 28,3
434
becoming a topic of increasing interest for both scientists and science policymakers (Moed et al., 1991; Katz and Hicks, 1997). International collaboration has its own benefits. It is generally considered to increase citation rates more than purely domestic collaboration (Gla¨nzel and Schubert, 2001; Narin et al., 1991; Katz and Hicks, 1997; Goldfinch et al., 2003) and to be especially beneficial for scientists from developing and underdeveloped countries (Rousseau, 2000; Goldfinch et al., 2003). Many countries encourage their scientists to collaborate internationally. Fortunately, researchers from developing countries are taking part in and benefiting from this opportunity (Wagner, 2005). The present survey aims to examine international research collaboration in Iran in order to determine the extent of international collaboration among Iranian researchers and the main international counterparts. In addition, it determines the impact of international collaboration on visibility of these publications. In this paper, publications in which Iranian researchers had cooperated with researchers from other countries were considered as international publications and those which were just co-published by Iranian colleagues were considered as domestic ones. The findings of this paper showed that the rate of publications by domestic author teams was higher than the rate of publications by international author teams in all examined years, and that only 22 percent of Iranian research publications that achieved global visibility in the science citation index (SCI) database were publications from international author teams. Objectives of the study This research mainly aims to study the situation and rate of international collaboration among Iranian researchers in SCI. Specific objectives of the study are as follows: . To study the growth rate of publications with international author teams against publications with domestic author teams during the period 1998-2007. . To study the proportion of publications with international author teams against domestic author teams in different subject categories. . To determine the number of Iran’s international counterparts. . To determine the rate of collaboration with the five continents and also with four groups of scientific countries of the world, including scientifically advanced, proficient, developing, and lagging countries. . To identify the main Iranian institutions taking part in international collaboration. . To investigate and compare citation impact of international co-authored publications against citation impact of domestic co-authored publications. Review of literature Collaboration and co-authorship has been the subject of many publications, but for the purpose of this paper, some related publications are reviewed. On the basis of articles published in Chinese scientific and technical periodicals in 1993, Haiqi and Hong (1997) analyzed the characteristics of scientific research collaboration in China by means of bibliometric indicators, collaborative index, and degree and level of collaboration. The findings showed that there was sufficient evidence of a steady increase in the number of authors per article and in the proportion of co-authored articles in China which was in line with international trends.
Basu and Kumar (2000) studied the international collaboration in Indian sciences during 1990-1994. They found that international collaboration increased among Indian researchers during that period. Indian researchers mostly cooperated with their colleagues in developed western countries and their main research partners were Americans. Kim (2005) investigated the pattern of Korean international collaboration during two periods, 1995-1997 and 1998-2000 and found a clear decrease in Korea’s international collaboration level. Among the top ten collaborating countries, only the Chinese and Canadian share of collaborative publications with Korea increased in the periods under consideration. Wagner (2005) examined international collaboration among researchers by fields of study (astrophysics, geophysics, mathematical logic, polymers, soil science, and virology), and showed that international collaboration grew in all fields at rates that were higher than the international average. Anuradha and Urs (2007) analyzed international collaboration patterns in Indian publications by tracking out multi-author publications as cited in the SCI database. According to correspondence analysis of the data sets, physics, chemistry, and clinical medicine were the first, second, and third largest subject areas having international collaboration. The USA, Italy, Germany, France, and UK were the top five countries which collaborated with India. Comprehensive macro-studies of international collaborations in sciences by Schubert and Braun (1990) and Gla¨nzel (2001) showed that the share of internationally co-authored papers in most countries has dramatically increased during the last two decades. Gla¨nzel (2001) also pointed out that the world standards indicated a higher expected citation rate of international publications in all fields of science. In another study, Gla¨nzel and de Lange (2002) had analyzed citation patterns of multi-national papers. They concluded that countries generally benefit from participation in multi-national projects. Research questions To answer the main question raised for this paper, we try to answer the following questions: RQ1. What is the growth rate of publications with international author teams against publications with domestic author teams during the period 1998-2007? RQ2. What subject categories have absorbed the largest number of publications with international author teams during the period 1998-2007? RQ3. How many countries have collaborated with Iran and what is its growth rate? RQ4. How is Iran’s scientific collaboration with the five continents and the countries categorized as scientifically advanced, proficient, developing, and lagging? RQ5. What are the main Iranian institutions participating in international collaboration? RQ6. Have citations received by publications with international author teams varied from those received by publications with domestic author teams?
International scientific collaboration 435
LHT 28,3
436
Data collection and methodology This paper employs the survey research method to answer research questions. To find Iranian researchers publications in SCI, the formula of “CU ¼ IRAN” was entered into advanced search box of web of science database, then SCI and the period 1998-2007 were selected. As a result, any publication recorded in the SCI database from 1998 to 2007 with at least one author affiliated to Iranian institutions was recognized and transferred to a database in Excel. The total records were 33,813. This number mostly includes articles, letters, notes, and reviews. Co-authorship was then used as the basis for studying the collaborative profile, so single author publications were omitted from the database. As a result, the total number of records decreased to 30,827. Co-authored publications were categorized by the country of authors as cited in the affiliation field. A publication was considered internationally co-authored only if its authors had affiliations from two or more countries. So, the main subsets of this paper consisted of 7,646 titles in which Iranian researchers have cooperated with foreign researchers. The study of subject categories devoted to total number of Iranian publications showed that they are published in 182 subfields. Institute for Scientific Information essential science indicators is a multidisciplinary tool, covering 22 fields of knowledge which were adopted in the present paper. In order to prevent subject dispersion, those 182 subfields were mapped into 22 broad fields using ScienceWatch webpage (field definitions; www.ScienceWatch.com) and Leydesdorff and Rafols (2009) paper. Then, the situation of international and domestic collaboration was compared among these 22 subject categories. To measure the impact of publications with international author teams against domestic teams, the number of citations received by all 30,827 co-authored publications has been counted for a three-year citation window beginning with the publication year. In addition to Microsoft Excel software, SPSS version 16 was also used for database creation. Exponential regression was used to determine the growth rate of papers with different collaboration patterns. The equation of this model is as follows in which Y is the number of co-authored papers, b is the coefficient of time called growth rate, and t is independent variable (here time): Y ¼ a:eb:t Research findings The comparison of the share of domestic and international publications per year showed that the number of publications with domestic author teams per year was 2-3.5 times more than that of publications with international author teams. The share of total domestic co-authored publications to total international co-authored titles during ten years was three to one. It is worth noting that during the investigated years only 22 percent of total Iranian scientific publications were published with the international collaboration pattern. An analysis of the growth rate of publications with domestic author teams and publications with international author teams (Figure 1) showed that in comparison with publications with international author teams, titles with domestic author teams have grown more over the period under consideration (Table I). The exponential regression test results proved the fact that domestic papers had a 25.6 percent growth, while this rate for international titles was 21.7 percent. These results were accurate and reliable at a confidence level of 95 percent (significance ¼ 0.001).
6,000 5,000
International scientific collaboration
y = 9E–22e0.256x R2 = 0.989
Domestic International
Products
4,000
437
3,000 y = 3E–18e0.217x R2 = 0.977
2,000
Figure 1. The growth rate of publications with domestic author teams against international ones
1,000 0 1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
Year
Year
Domestic (D)
International (I)
Proportion (D/I)
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Total
619 757 890 1,143 1,379 1,830 2,725 3,631 4,719 5,488 23,181
282 275 356 431 462 708 902 1,201 1,362 1,667 7,646
2.20 2.75 2.50 2.65 2.98 2.58 3.02 3.02 3.46 3.29 3.03
Table I. The frequency distribution of publications with domestic and international author teams
In order to determine whether the regression line for each collaboration pattern had the best fitness, the correlation between expected and residual values were measured, and showed no correlation in either pattern (Table II). Figure 2 shows that 62.1 percent of publications in geosciences and 51.2 percent of publications in economics and business have international collaboration. Pharmacology (18.6 percent) and chemistry (18.7 percent) have the lowest number of Correlations Expected Residuals
Pearson correlation Significance (two-tailed) n Pearson correlation Significance (two-tailed) n
Expected
Residuals
1
0.260 0.468 10 1
10 0.260 0.468 10
10
Table II. The correlation between expected and residual values of publications with domestic and international author teams
LHT 28,3
Pharmacology Chemistry Multidisciplinary Immunology
438
Neuroscience and behaviour Clinical medicine
18.56 81.44 18.72 81.28
20.66
79.34
21.05
78.95 21.10 78.90 21.96
78.04
23.18
Biology and biochemistry
76.82 24.04
Psychiatry/psychology
75.96 26.17
Mathematics
73.83 26.89
Space sciences
73.11
27.04
Agricultural sciences
72.96 31.33
Microbiology
68.67
31.84
Physics
68.16
32.04
Plant and animal science
67.96 33.17
Materials science
66.83
33.26
Molecular biology and genetics
62.06 40.67
Environment/ecology
59.33 42.40
Social sciences, general
45.14
Engineering
Figure 2. The distribution of publications with domestic and international author teams in different subject categories
Economics and business Geosciences 0.00
66.74
37.94
Computer science
37.86 20.00
40.00
57.60
54.86 51.16 48.84 62.14 60.00
International
80.00
100.00
Domestic
international publications. It should be noted that economics and business are considered as social and humanities subject areas, as a result they have limited number of publications in SCI. In fact, only 43 publications in SCI categorized as economics and business which about half of them were internationally published. Chemistry with 11,092 publications as cited by other writers like Osareh and Wilson (2005) was the most productive subject area but its number of international publications was 2,076 titles (18.7 percent) which was not so considerable. Iranian researchers had joint publications with their colleagues in 115 countries over the examined years. In 1998, the number of collaborating countries was 38, which by 2007 had increased to 83 countries. In fact, the number of collaborating countries has doubled during this period (Figure 3). A list of collaborating countries is shown in Table III.
No. of collaborating countries 79 71
83 75
International scientific collaboration
60 46
49
47
50
38
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Iran’s main partners at international level were the USA, Canada, and UK with 1,675, 1,277, and 1,181 joint publications, respectively. Considering overall scientific size of each collaborating country, it should be noted that although about 5 percent of Iran’s publications during the ten-year period were published in cooperation with American scientists, only 0.1 percent of all USA’s publications were co-authored with their Iranian colleagues. In addition, 0.2 percent of Canada’s publications and 0.1 percent of UK publications only were co-authored with Iranian researchers during the examined years. In this paper, 115 collaborating countries with Iran were grouped in two ways. The first was a continental group which categorized countries into five subgroups, i.e. Asia, Africa, America, Europe, and Oceania. The number of joint publications of each continent with Iran was then calculated. The results showed that Iranian researchers had mostly co-published with their colleagues in Europe, America, Asia, and Oceania, respectively, (Table IV and Figure 4). The second was categorizing collaborating countries into four groups including: scientifically advanced, proficient, developing, and lagging countries. This kind of grouping was based on the fact that different countries have different capacities to conduct scientific research and to perform research. Many factors contribute to scientific and research capacity including national infrastructure (e.g. communication and transportation networks and legal systems); the pool of scientists, engineers, and other trained workforce; laboratories and other research facilities; and academic institutions. Wagner et al. (2001) developed an index of scientific and technological capacity for 150 nations which is constructed on the basis of the available national-level data like gross national product, number of scientists and engineers, number of S&T journal articles, and patents. According to this index, the scientifically advanced group includes 22 countries, the proficient group includes 24 countries, the developing group includes 24 countries, and the lagging group includes 80 countries. It should be mentioned that due to a lack of statistics (Wagner et al., 2001) some collaborating countries including Qatar, Cyprus, Bahrain, Serbia, Montenegro, Granada, and Monaco were not included in these 150 countries. As shown in Table V, in terms of co-authored publications, the main partners of Iranian researchers were scientifically advanced countries. Scientifically proficient countries came second with slightly more diversification than advanced countries. The third and fourth partner groups were scientifically lagging and developing countries, respectively.
439 Figure 3. Number of countries cooperated with Iran per year
LHT 28,3
440
Table III. Collaborating countries with Iran in SCI
Country USA Canada UK Germany Australia France Japan Italy India Sweden The Netherlands Scotland Russia Switzerland People’s Republic China Turkey Spain Belgium Austria Malaysia Wales South Korea Taiwan Denmark New Zealand Finland Pakistan Poland Brazil Sri Lanka Tajikistan Nigeria Bulgaria Cyprus Slovakia Tunisia Macedonia Serbia Monteneg Oman Estonia Slovenia Chile Iraq Uzbekistan Vietnam Jordan Yugoslavia Venezuela Libya Bahrain
No. of total publications (P)
No. of co-publications with Iran (CP)
1,520,216 442,508 767,117 828,885 269,195 576,208 852,296 436,360 232,104 180,812 247,383 116,660 270,906 181,570 518,069 114,211 305,392 134,671 96,747 13,369 37,866 217,620 138,621 97,842 51,044 87,240 10,265 134,127 162,359 2,596 241 9,658 18,001 2,431 21,653 10,131 1,746 2,714 2,765 7,137 18,399 27,168 945 3,606 4,677 6,005 10,117 11,770 711 896
1,675 1,277 1,181 575 533 497 339 289 222 213 175 166 146 129 121 119 117 108 99 96 85 65 60 58 50 48 42 40 35 9 8 8 8 7 7 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3
P/CP (%) 0.11 0.29 0.15 0.07 0.20 0.09 0.04 0.07 0.10 0.12 0.07 0.14 0.05 0.07 0.02 0.10 0.04 0.08 0.10 0.72 0.22 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.10 0.06 0.41 0.03 0.02 0.35 3.32 0.08 0.04 0.29 0.03 0.06 0.29 0.18 0.18 0.07 0.03 0.02 0.42 0.11 0.09 0.07 0.04 0.03 0.42 0.33 (continued)
Country Tanzania Serbia Kenya Cuba Lithuania Belarus Malagasy Monaco Greece South Africa Azerbaijan Czech Republic Kuwait Ukraine Norway Hungary Republic of Georgia Argentina Armenia United Arab Emirates North Ireland Qatar Israel Saudi Arabia Thailand Portugal Grenada Morocco Lebanon Philippines Singapore Croatia Egypt Mexico Syria Algeria Romania Cote dIvoire Jamaica Ghana Kazakhstan Ethiopia Iceland Bangladesh Indonesia Turkmenistan Montenegro Laos Cambodia French Guiana
No. of total publications (P) 3,089 6,471 6,628 6,909 7,825 2 336 624 76,980 46,791 2,064 58,143 5,903 43,563 62,114 52,118 3,183 54,918 4,035 4,783 18,838 978 113,786 16,737 22,352 50,244 98 10,851 4,719 4,919 51,718 15,910 29,963 64,701 1,460 6,500 24,907 1,448 1,645 2,158 2,249 2,749 4,515 5,031 5,465 75 108 271 415 431
No. of co-publications with Iran (CP) 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 31 29 28 26 25 23 23 22 20 20 19 19 18 17 17 16 16 15 14 14 13 12 12 11 11 11 10 10 10 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1
P/CP (%) 0.10 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 100 0.60 0.32 0.04 0.06 1.36 0.04 0.42 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.63 0.04 0.47 0.40 0.10 1.74 0.01 0.10 0.07 0.03 14.29 0.13 0.28 0.24 0.02 0.07 0.04 0.02 0.68 0.15 0.04 0.14 0.12 0.09 0.09 0.07 0.04 0.04 0.04 1.33 0.93 0.37 0.24 0.23 (continued)
International scientific collaboration 441
Table III.
LHT 28,3
442
Table III.
No. of total publications (P)
Country Kyrgyzstan Albania Mozambique Gambia Benin Botswana Sudan Ecuador Senegal Zimbabwe Cameroon Peru Latvia Hong Kong Colombia
No. of co-publications with Iran (CP)
442 497 504 806 843 1,134 1,164 1,657 2,138 2,223 2,896 3,464 3,780 7,585 8,499
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
P/CP (%) 0.23 0.20 0.20 0.12 0.12 0.09 0.09 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.01
Year Continent 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Total Percentage Table IV. The number of Iran’s co-publications with five continents
Asia Africa Europe America Oceania
41 2 147 112 22
35 2 129 126 37
76 7 177 137 25
80 5 195 191 21
87 9 216 191 52
138 7 375 343 72
168 21 465 381 60
243 25 622 435 78
248 30 691 486 91
360 41 998 632 125
1,476 149 4,015 3,034 583
15.92 1.6 43.29 32.72 6.29
4,015 3,034
1,476
Figure 4. Number of Iran’s co-publications with five continents
Table V. The number of Iran’s joint publications with four groups of countries
583 149
Asia
Africa
Europe
America
Oceania
Grouping countries scientifically
Advanced
Proficient
Developing
Lagging
No. of co-authored publications Percentage
7,627 83.91
825 9.08
276 3.04
310 3.41
In order to determine the most productive Iranian research institutions in international joint publications, the affiliations of authors were carefully investigated. After discovering different forms of an institution’s name, the occurrences of each one were calculated. The results showed that the University of Tehran, with 1,079 joint publications, had the most co-published publications and Sharif University of Technology came second. The list of top ten institutions has been shown in Table VI. These institutions published more than 50 percent of Iran’s international co-publications. To investigate visibility and impact of publications resulted from international collaboration, the average number of citations for publications with international author teams, and for publications with domestic author teams were calculated and compared. On the basis of the results, the average number of citations per paper resulted from international co-authorship (3.9 citations per paper) was approximately twice than citations resulted from domestic collaboration (2.3 citations per paper; Table VII). In addition, Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated between number of countries and number of citations per paper which showed a significant correlation at the 0.01 level (Table VIII).
Institution
International collaboration Domestic collaboration
No. of countries No. of citations
443
Internationally coauthored papers
The University of Tehran Sharif University of Technology Tehran University of Medical Sciences Isfahan University of Technology Tarbiat Modarres University Shiraz University The Institute for Research in Fundamental Sciences Amirkabir University of Technology Iran University of Science and Technology Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
Variable
International scientific collaboration
1,079 637 452 408 370 333 308 236 235 210
Table VI. The Iranian research institutions participating in international co-publications
No. of publications
No. of citations
Ave. C/P
7,739 23,088
30,183 53,102
3.9 2.3
No. of countries
No. of citations
1
0.685 * 0.000 30,827 1
Pearson correlation Significance (two-tailed) n Pearson correlation Significance (two-tailed) n
Note: *Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed)
30,827 0.685 * 0.000 30,827
30,827
Table VII. International collaboration and citation
Table VIII. Results of Pearson’s correlation test
LHT 28,3
444
Discussion and conclusions The investigation of the rate of joint domestic and international joint publications showed that the rate of domestic articles was higher than that of international co-publications in each year beginning in 1998 and continuing through 2007. The growth rate of articles with both patterns also reveals that the growth rate of publications with international author teams is lower than that of domestic ones. It seems that the proportion of publications with international author teams was decreasing against the increase in the proportion of domestic ones. All in all, the proportion of domestic articles to international was 3-1 over the ten year period. The number of Iranian international co-authored publications to total publications, which was 22 percent in comparison to this rate in other countries, was not so significant. Luukkonen et al. (1991) showed that about one third of the articles in Nordic countries are internationally co-authored. The study of the growth rate of co-authored international publications does not match the international results of the present research. According to Melin (2000), international joint publications in the science field are rapidly increasing. Luukkonen et al. (1992) indicated that the number of internationally co-authored articles had doubled during the last ten to 15 years. Also, Schubert and Braun (1990) and Gla¨nzel (2001) stated that the share of internationally co-authored publications has dramatically increased in most countries during the last two decades. International collaborations in science and technology are a top priority for the Iranian Government and policy makers (Harirchi et al., 2007). The Ministry of Science, Research, and Technology of Iran has encouraged Iranian researchers to publish their manuscripts in high ranking international scientific journals (Osareh and Wilson, 2000). However, the proportion of Iranian international co-publications in comparison with domestic ones is not considerable. It seems that the scientific gap between Iranian universities and other universities of the world, particularly American and European universities, has widened in recent years. As a result, scientists from other countries have little or no tendency to collaborate with Iranian scientists, especially those who are active in Iranian universities and research centers. It is true that the internet puts aside geographical and physical boundaries, but having scientific relations, especially at the international level, should be supported by favorable international political relations, something which Iranian scholars suffer from. The results of investigating the rate of international collaboration among Iranian researchers in different fields revealed that the rate of international collaboration was lower than domestic collaboration in most fields. Geosciences had the biggest number of publications co-authored internationally. Although it was expected that the most productive fields showed the more international collaboration, the result was vice versa and chemistry as the most productive field in Iran had the lowest percentage of publications co-authored internationally. Harirchi et al. (2007) also came to the same result that international collaboration was not much considerable among Iranian researchers in different fields. The findings of the study also showed that international research collaboration enhanced the quality of research. We found a significant correlation between number of countries cooperated per paper and the number of citations received by those papers and came to this result that the number of citations received by international co-authored publications was more than the number of citations received by domestic co-authored publications. The results of different research have also shown that
international collaboration can influence research impact (Narin et al., 1991; Schmoch and Schubert, 2008; Sooryamoorthy, 2009). Like many other developing countries (Wagner et al., 2001), Iranian scholars collaborate first and foremost with researchers in the leading scientific nations. Iran’s main partners are scientifically advanced countries and Iranian researchers have co-published more with American researchers. The unique economic, financial, scientific, and cultural potential and facilities of this country have made it more attractive for researchers in other countries to collaborate with its researchers. At the end, as a limitation for our research, it should be mentioned that present paper has be done on data gathered from SCI database which tracks publications in journals that SCI has selected. So, we have done our research on those publications covered by SCI and not all Iranian scientific outputs during the examined years. References Anuradha, K.T. and Urs, Sh.R. (2007), “Bibliometric indicators of Indian research collaboration patterns: a correspondence analysis”, Scientometrics, Vol. 71 No. 2, pp. 179-89. Avkiran, N.K. (1997), “Scientific collaboration in finance does not lead to better quality research”, Scientometrics, Vol. 39, pp. 173-84. Basu, A. and Kumar, V. (2000), “International collaboration in Indian scientific papers”, Scientometrics, Vol. 48 No. 3, pp. 381-402. Gla¨nzel, W. (2001), “National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations”, Scientometrics, Vol. 51, pp. 69-115. Gla¨nzel, W. and de Lange, C. (2002), “A distributional approach to multinationality measures of international scientific collaboration”, Scientometrics, Vol. 54, pp. 75-89. Gla¨nzel, W. and Schubert, A. (2001), “Double effort¼double impact? A critical view at international co-authorship in chemistry”, Scientometrics, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 199-214. Gla¨nzel, W., Schubert, A. and Czerwon, H.-J. (1999), “A bibliometric analysis of international scientific cooperation of the european union (1985-1995)”, Scientometrics, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 185-202. Goldfinch, S., Dale, T. and DeRouen, K. (2003), “Science from the periphery: collaboration, networks and ‘periphery effects’ in the citation of New Zealand Crown Research Institutes articles, 1995-2000”, Scientometrics, Vol. 57, pp. 321-37. Haiqi, Z. and Hong, G. (1997), “Scientific research collaboration in China”, Scientometrics, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 309-19. Harirchi, G., Melin, G. and Etemad, S. (2007), “An exploratory study of the feature of Iranian co-authorships in biology, chemistry and physics”, Scientometrics, Vol. 72 No. 1, pp. 11-24. Katz, J.S. and Hicks, D. (1997), “How much is a collaboration worth? A calibrated bibliometric model”, Scientometrics, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 541-54. Katz, J.S. and Martin, B.R. (1997), “What is research collaboration?”, Research Policy, Vol. 26, pp. 1-18. Kim, M.-J. (2005), “Korean science and international collaboration, 1995-2000”, Scientometrics, Vol. 63 No. 2, pp. 321-39. Leydesdorff, L. and Rafols, I. (2009), “A global map of science based on the ISI subject categories”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 60 No. 2, pp. 348-62. Luukkonen, T., Persson, O. and Sivertsen, G. (1991), “Nordic collaboration in science, Nordic Council of Ministers”, Nord, p. 28.
International scientific collaboration 445
LHT 28,3
446
Luukkonen, T., Persson, O. and Sivertsen, G. (1992), “Understanding patterns of international scientific collaboration”, Science, Technology and Human Values, Vol. 17, pp. 101-26. Melin, G. (2000), “Pragmatism and self-organization research collaboration on the individual level”, Research Policy, Vol. 29, pp. 31-40. Moed, H.F., de Bruin, R.E., Nederhof, A.J. and Tijssen, R.J.W. (1991), “International scientific co-operation and awareness within the European community: problems and perspectives”, Scientometrics, Vol. 21, pp. 291-311. Narin, F., Stevens, K. and Whitlow, E.S. (1991), “Scientific co-operation in Europe and the citation of multinationally authored papers”, Scientometrics, Vol. 21, pp. 313-23. Osareh, F. and Wilson, S. (2000), “Collaboration in Iranian scientific publications”, Libri, Vol. 52, pp. 88-98. Osareh, F. and Wilson, S. (2005), “Iranian publications: collaboration and development from 1985-1999”, Faslname-Ketab, Vol. 62, pp. 131-44. Pao, M.L. (1992), “Global and local collaborators: a study of scientific collaboration”, Information Processing and Management, Vol. 28, pp. 99-109. Rousseau, R. (2000), “Are multi-authored articles cited more than single-authored ones? Are collaborations with authors from other countries more cited than collaborations within the country? A case study”, Proceedings of the Second Berlin Workshop on Scientometrics and Informetrics, Collaboration in Science and in Technology, Free University, Berlin, 1-3 September, pp. 173-6. Schmoch, U. and Schubert, T. (2008), “Are international co-publications an indicator for quality of scientific research?”, Scientometrics, Vol. 74 No. 3, pp. 361-77. Schubert, A. and Braun, T. (1990), “World flash on basic research: international collaboration in the sciences, 1981-1985”, Scientometrics, Vol. 1, pp. 3-10. Sooryamoorthy, R. (2009), “Do types of collaboration change citation? Collaboration and citation patterns of South African science publications”, Scientometrics, Vol. 81 No. 1, pp. 177-93. Wagner, C.S. (2005), “Six case studies of international collaboration in science”, Scientometrics, Vol. 62 No. 1, pp. 3-26. Wagner, C.S., Brahmakulam, I., Jackson, B., Wong, A. and Yoda, T. (2001), Science and Technology Collaboration: Building Capacity in Developing Countries?, RAND, Santa Monica, CA. Further reading de Lange, C. and Gla¨nzel, W. (1997), “Modelling and measuring multilateral co-authorship in international scientific collaboration. Part I. Development of a new model using a series expansion approach”, Scientometrics, Vol. 40, pp. 593-604. Qin, J., Lancaster, F.W. and Allen, B. (1997), “Types and levels of collaboration in interdisciplinary research in the sciences”, Journal of American Society for Information Science, Vol. 48, pp. 893-916. About the authors Zouhayr Hayati is an Associated Professor in the LIS Department, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran. Zouhayr Hayati is the corresponding author and can be contacted at:
[email protected] Fereshteh Didegah is based in the LIS Department, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail:
[email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
