Deconstructing the collaborative impact: Article and author characteristics that influence citation count

Lori A. Hurley, Andrea L. Ogier, Vetle I. Torvik

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

It is well known that collaborative papers tend to receive more citations than solo-authored papers. Here we try to identify the subtle factors of this collaborative effect by analyzing metadata and citation counts for co-authored papers in the biomedical domain, after accounting for attributes known to be strong predictors of citation count. Article-level metadata were gathered from 98,000 PubMed article records categorized with the term breast neoplasm, a topic offering longevity and relevance across biomedical subdisciplines, and yielding a relatively large sample size. Open access citation data was obtained from PubMed Central (PMC). Author-level attributes were encoded from disambiguated author name data in PubMed and appended as article-level attributes of collaborations. A logistic regression model was built to assess the relative weights of these factors as influences on citation counts. As expected, the journal and language of the paper were the strongest predictors. The significance of the number of authors diminished after accounting for other attributes. Some of the more subtle predictors included the group's highest hindex, which was positively correlated, while the diversity of author h-indices, minimum professional age, and author's total unique collaborators were negatively correlated. These observations indicate that smaller collaborations composed of early superstars-young, rapidly successful researchers with relatively high and similar h-indices-may be at least as influential in biomedical research as larger collaborations with different demographics. While minimum h-index was important, the first author's h-index was insignificant, underscoring the importance of the middle authors' publishing history. The gender diversity outcomes suggest that mixed groups may be ideal, and further research in this area is indicated.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalProceedings of the ASIST Annual Meeting
Volume50
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Metadata
Logistics
open access
Group
logistics
regression
gender
history
language

Keywords

  • Bibliometrics
  • Citation analysis
  • Collaboration
  • Impact

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Information Systems
  • Library and Information Sciences

Cite this

Deconstructing the collaborative impact : Article and author characteristics that influence citation count. / Hurley, Lori A.; Ogier, Andrea L.; Torvik, Vetle I.

In: Proceedings of the ASIST Annual Meeting, Vol. 50, No. 1, 2013.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{90d0cd303d2840b0849c6c82983441a4,
title = "Deconstructing the collaborative impact: Article and author characteristics that influence citation count",
abstract = "It is well known that collaborative papers tend to receive more citations than solo-authored papers. Here we try to identify the subtle factors of this collaborative effect by analyzing metadata and citation counts for co-authored papers in the biomedical domain, after accounting for attributes known to be strong predictors of citation count. Article-level metadata were gathered from 98,000 PubMed article records categorized with the term breast neoplasm, a topic offering longevity and relevance across biomedical subdisciplines, and yielding a relatively large sample size. Open access citation data was obtained from PubMed Central (PMC). Author-level attributes were encoded from disambiguated author name data in PubMed and appended as article-level attributes of collaborations. A logistic regression model was built to assess the relative weights of these factors as influences on citation counts. As expected, the journal and language of the paper were the strongest predictors. The significance of the number of authors diminished after accounting for other attributes. Some of the more subtle predictors included the group's highest hindex, which was positively correlated, while the diversity of author h-indices, minimum professional age, and author's total unique collaborators were negatively correlated. These observations indicate that smaller collaborations composed of early superstars-young, rapidly successful researchers with relatively high and similar h-indices-may be at least as influential in biomedical research as larger collaborations with different demographics. While minimum h-index was important, the first author's h-index was insignificant, underscoring the importance of the middle authors' publishing history. The gender diversity outcomes suggest that mixed groups may be ideal, and further research in this area is indicated.",
keywords = "Bibliometrics, Citation analysis, Collaboration, Impact",
author = "Hurley, {Lori A.} and Ogier, {Andrea L.} and Torvik, {Vetle I.}",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1002/meet.14505001070",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "50",
journal = "Proceedings of the ASIST Annual Meeting",
issn = "1550-8390",
publisher = "Learned Information",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Deconstructing the collaborative impact

T2 - Article and author characteristics that influence citation count

AU - Hurley, Lori A.

AU - Ogier, Andrea L.

AU - Torvik, Vetle I.

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - It is well known that collaborative papers tend to receive more citations than solo-authored papers. Here we try to identify the subtle factors of this collaborative effect by analyzing metadata and citation counts for co-authored papers in the biomedical domain, after accounting for attributes known to be strong predictors of citation count. Article-level metadata were gathered from 98,000 PubMed article records categorized with the term breast neoplasm, a topic offering longevity and relevance across biomedical subdisciplines, and yielding a relatively large sample size. Open access citation data was obtained from PubMed Central (PMC). Author-level attributes were encoded from disambiguated author name data in PubMed and appended as article-level attributes of collaborations. A logistic regression model was built to assess the relative weights of these factors as influences on citation counts. As expected, the journal and language of the paper were the strongest predictors. The significance of the number of authors diminished after accounting for other attributes. Some of the more subtle predictors included the group's highest hindex, which was positively correlated, while the diversity of author h-indices, minimum professional age, and author's total unique collaborators were negatively correlated. These observations indicate that smaller collaborations composed of early superstars-young, rapidly successful researchers with relatively high and similar h-indices-may be at least as influential in biomedical research as larger collaborations with different demographics. While minimum h-index was important, the first author's h-index was insignificant, underscoring the importance of the middle authors' publishing history. The gender diversity outcomes suggest that mixed groups may be ideal, and further research in this area is indicated.

AB - It is well known that collaborative papers tend to receive more citations than solo-authored papers. Here we try to identify the subtle factors of this collaborative effect by analyzing metadata and citation counts for co-authored papers in the biomedical domain, after accounting for attributes known to be strong predictors of citation count. Article-level metadata were gathered from 98,000 PubMed article records categorized with the term breast neoplasm, a topic offering longevity and relevance across biomedical subdisciplines, and yielding a relatively large sample size. Open access citation data was obtained from PubMed Central (PMC). Author-level attributes were encoded from disambiguated author name data in PubMed and appended as article-level attributes of collaborations. A logistic regression model was built to assess the relative weights of these factors as influences on citation counts. As expected, the journal and language of the paper were the strongest predictors. The significance of the number of authors diminished after accounting for other attributes. Some of the more subtle predictors included the group's highest hindex, which was positively correlated, while the diversity of author h-indices, minimum professional age, and author's total unique collaborators were negatively correlated. These observations indicate that smaller collaborations composed of early superstars-young, rapidly successful researchers with relatively high and similar h-indices-may be at least as influential in biomedical research as larger collaborations with different demographics. While minimum h-index was important, the first author's h-index was insignificant, underscoring the importance of the middle authors' publishing history. The gender diversity outcomes suggest that mixed groups may be ideal, and further research in this area is indicated.

KW - Bibliometrics

KW - Citation analysis

KW - Collaboration

KW - Impact

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84903977734&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84903977734&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/meet.14505001070

DO - 10.1002/meet.14505001070

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84903977734

VL - 50

JO - Proceedings of the ASIST Annual Meeting

JF - Proceedings of the ASIST Annual Meeting

SN - 1550-8390

IS - 1

ER -