The relational properties of collaborative networks and the generation of scientific knowledge: a question of size or of balance?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2014.4.1143Keywords:
Individual networks, organizational networks, scientists, nanotechnology, academic performanceAbstract
This article analyses the effect of networks of scientists on the quantity and quality of their academic output. Information on the characteristics of the networks comes from a questionnaire completed by 191 Spanish academic scientists working in the field of nanotechnology. The article considers the networks that these scientists establish with other individuals and through organizations and examines how the degree of embeddedness and nodal heterogeneity of these networks affects scientists’ output. The findings show that the balance achieved among members of a network –whether individual or organizational-- explains more about the quantity and quality of academic output, than the size of the network. Regardless of their size, more integrated and geographically balanced networks of individuals enhance academic production; additionally their geographic balance also serves to enhance the quality of the output. In the case of organizational networks with a well-balanced institutional diversity, there is a greater quantity of academic production, as opposed to those organizational networks characterized by a geographic balance.
Downloads
References
Boorman, B. (1975). A combinational optimization model for transmission of job information through contact networks. Bell Journal of Economics, vol. 6 (1), 216-249. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3003223
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. En: Richardson, J. G. (editores) Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education. Greenwood; New York (241–258).
Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge; Harvard University Press, p. 313.
Burt, R. S. (1997). The contingent value of social capital. Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 42 (2), 339-365. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2393923
Burt, R. S. (2001). Structural Holes Versus Network Closure as Social Capital. En: Lin, N.; Cook, K.; Burt, R. S. (editores) Social Capital: Theory and Research. Sociology and Economics: Controversy and Integration series. Aldine de Gruyter; New York (31–56).
Callon, M. (1986). Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. En: Law, J. (editor) Power, action and belief: a new sociology of knowledge? London; Routledge (196-223).
Callon, M.; Law, J.; Rip, A. (1986). Mapping the dynamics of science and technology: sociology of science in the real world. Basingstoke; Palgrave Macmillan, p. 242.
Carayol, N.; Matt, M. (2006). Individual and collective determinants of academic scientists' productivity. Information Economics and Policy, vol. 18 (1), 55-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.infoecopol.2005.09.002
Coleman, J. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 95–120. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/228943
Coleman, J. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge MA; Harvard University Press, p. 1014.
Correia, A.; Roldán-Hernández, J. L.; Serena-Domingo, P. A. (2004). Estudios sobre las actividades y necesidades en el área de las Nanociencias/Nanotecnologías. Madrid; FECYT (Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia), p. 109.
Etzkowitz, H.; Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, vol. 29 (2), 109-123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4
Gnyawali, D. R.; Madhavan, R. (2001). Cooperative networks and competitive dynamics: A structural embeddedness perspective. The Academy of Management Review, vol. 26 (3), 431-445. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2001.4845820
Godin, B.; Gingras, Y. (2000). Impact of collaborative research on academic science. Science and Public Policy, vol. 27 (1), 65-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.3152/147154300781782147
Gordon, M. (1980). A critical reassessment of inferred relations between multiple authorship, scientific collaboration, the production of papers and their acceptance for publication. Scientometrics, vol. 2 (3), 193-201. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02016697
Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology, vol. 78 (6), 1360-1380. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/225469
Granovetter, M. S. (1985). Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/228311
Gulati, R. (1998). Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal (1986-1998), vol. 19 (4), 293-317.
Gulbrandsen, M.; Smeby, J. C. (2005). Industry funding and university professors' research performance. Research Policy, vol. 34 (6), 932-950. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.05.004
Hullmann, A. (2006). The economic development of nanotechnology: An indicators based analysis. Bruselas; European Commission, DG Research, Unit "Nano S&T - Convergent Science and Technologies", p. 34.
Islam, N.; Miyazaki, K. (2009). Nanotechnology innovation system: Understanding hidden dynamics of nanoscience fusion trajectories. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, vol. 76 (1), 128-140. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2008.03.021
Katz, J. S.; Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, vol. 26 (1), 1-18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(96)00917-1
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago; University of Chicago Press, p. 226.
Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action. How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge; Milton Keynes, Open University Press, p. 274.
Laudel, G. (2001). Collaboration, creativity and rewards: Why and how scientists collaborate? International Journal of Technology Management, vol. 22 (7/8), 762-781. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2001.002990
McFadyen, M. A.; Cannella Jr., A. A. (2004). Social capital and knowledge creation: Diminishing returns of the number and strength of exchange relationships. Academy of Management Journal, vol. 47 (5), 735-746. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/20159615
McEvily, B.; Zaheer, A. (1999). Bridging ties: A source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, vol. 20 (12), 1133-1156. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199912)20:12<1133::AID-SMJ74>3.0.CO;2-7
Merton, R. K. (1942). The normative structure of science. En: Merton R. K. (editor) The sociology of science: theoretical and empirical investigations. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (267-280).
Meyer, M.; Libaers, D.; Park, J-H. (2011). The emergence of novel science-related fields: Regional or technological patterns? Exploitation in United Kingdom Nanotechnology. Regional Studies, vol. 45 (7), 935-959. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00343401003792468
Meyer, M.; Morlacchi, P.; Persson, O.; Archambault, E.; Malsch, I. (2004). Continuous professional development in emerging technology sectors. SPRU Report for the Engineering and Technology Board, 1-60. SPRU - University of Sussex.
Mulkay, M. (1979). Science and the Sociology of Knowledge. London; Allen & Unwin, p. 144.
National Nanotechnology Initiative. (2002). Small Wonders, Endless Frontiers. Washington, D.C.; National Academy Press, p. 58.
Nowotny, H.; Scott, P.; Gibbons, M. (2001). Re-thinking science. Knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge; Polity Press, p. 288.
Nowotny, H.; Scott, P.; Gibbons, M. (2003). Introduction: `Mode 2' Revisited: The New Production of Knowledge. Minerva, vol. 41 (3), 179-194. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1025505528250
Ott, I.; Papilloud, C. (2007). Converging Institutions: Shaping Relationships Between Nanotechnologies, Economy, and Society. Bulletin of Science Technology Society, vol. 27 (6), 455-466. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0270467607309764
Palmberg, C.; Dernis, H.; Miguet, C. (2009). Nanotechnology: An overview based on indicators and statistics. STI Working Paper 2009/7. Statistical Analysis of Science, Technology and Industry. Paris; OECD/OCDE, p. 112.
Polanyi, M. (1966). The Tacit Dimension. London; Routledge & Kegan Paul, p. 128.
Pravdić, N.; Oluić-Vuković, V. (1986). Dual approach to multiple authorship in the study of collaboration/scientific output relationship. Scientometrics, vol. 10 (5), 259-280. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02016774
Reagans, R.; Zuckerman, E. W. (2001). Networks, diversity, and productivity: The social capital of corporate R&D teams. Organization Science, vol. 12 (4), 502-517. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.12.4.502.10637
Rigby, J.; Edler, J. (2005). Peering inside research networks: Some observations on the effect of the intensity of collaboration on the variability of research quality. Research Policy, vol. 34 (6), 784-794. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.02.004
Salerno, M.; Landoni, P.; Verganti, R. (2008). Designing foresight studies for nanoscience and nanotechnology (NST) future developments. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, vol. 75 (8), 1202–1223. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2007.11.011
Shannon, C. E.; Weaver W. (1959). The Mathematical Theory of Communication [1949]. Urbana, IL.; University of Illinois Press, p. 144.
Smeby, J.C.; Try, S. (2005) Departmental contexts and faculty research activity in Norway. Research in Higher Education, vol. 46 (6), 593-619. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11162-004-4136-2
Stix, G. (2001). Little Big Science. Scientific American, vol. 285 (3), 32-37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0901-32
Subramanyam, K. (1983). Bibliometric studies of research collaboration: A review. Journal of Information Science, vol. 6 (1), 33-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/016555158300600105
Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 42 (1), 35-67. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2393808
Villanueva-Felez, A. (2011). El acceso a recursos desde una perspectiva relacional: Un análisis contingente de las características de los vínculos sociales. Tesis Doctoral. Valencia: Universidad de Valencia.
Villanueva-Felez, A.; Molas-Gallart, J.; Escribá Esteve, A. (2013). Measuring personal networks and their relationship with scientific production. Minerva, vol. 51 (4), 465-483. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11024-013-9239-5
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2014 Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
© CSIC. Manuscripts published in both the print and online versions of this journal are the property of the Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, and quoting this source is a requirement for any partial or full reproduction.
All contents of this electronic edition, except where otherwise noted, are distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence. You may read here the basic information and the legal text of the licence. The indication of the CC BY 4.0 licence must be expressly stated in this way when necessary.
Self-archiving in repositories, personal webpages or similar, of any version other than the final version of the work produced by the publisher, is not allowed.
