Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributor.authorÁvila-Toscano, José Hernando
dc.contributor.authorMarenco-Escuderos, Ailed Daniela
dc.contributor.authorRomero-Pérez, Ivón Katherine
dc.date.accessioned2019-07-09T22:27:24Z
dc.date.available2019-07-09T22:27:24Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier.issn11321873
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12442/3486
dc.description.abstractEste estudio analizó las propiedades estructurales en redes de coautoría y colaboración institucional en Ciencias Sociales, a partir de los artículos publicados entre 2006 y 2015 por 3804 autores de siete disciplinas. Las características estructurales se calcularon mediante Análisis de Redes Sociales y fueron comparadas según género de autores y áreas de conocimiento. No se hallaron diferencias significativas en relación con el género, pero disciplinariamente se observan diferencias en la cercanía e importancia relativa de los autores. Las redes institucionales mostraron baja densidad, alta fragmentación y poca cohesión. En ciencias sociales en Colombia crece el número mujeres con productividad similar a los hombres; institucionalmente se requiere de estrategias que dinamicen la cooperación con miras a mejorar el impacto de las producciones.spa
dc.description.abstractThis study analyzed the structural properties in networks of co-authorship and institutional collaboration in Social Sciences, based on articles published between 2006 and 2015 by 3,804 authors from seven disciplines. The structural characteristics were calculatedthrough Social Network Analysis and were compared according to the gender of the authors and areas of knowledge. No significant differences were found in relation to gender, but disciplinary differences were observed in the closeness and relative importance of the authors. The institutional networks showed low density, high fragmentation and little cohesion. In the social sciences in Colombia the number of women with productivity similar to men grows; institutionally, strategies are needed to stimulate cooperation to improve the impact of productions.eng
dc.language.isospaspa
dc.publisherEdiciones Complutensespa
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.sourceRevista General de Información y Documentaciónspa
dc.sourceVol. 29, N° 1 (2019)spa
dc.source.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.5209/rgid.64545spa
dc.subjectRedes de cooperaciónspa
dc.subjectGénerospa
dc.subjectCiencias socialesspa
dc.subjectInstitucionesspa
dc.subjectCooperation networkseng
dc.subjectGendereng
dc.subjectSocial scienceseng
dc.subjectInstitutionseng
dc.titleRedes de cooperación entre autores e instituciones en Ciencias Sociales dentro del modelo científico colombiano: comparación por género y área del conocimientospa
dc.title.alternativeCooperation networks between authors and institutions in Social Sciences within the Colombian scientific model: comparison by gender and area of knowledgeeng
dc.typearticlespa
dcterms.referencesAbramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A. & Caprasecca, A. (2009). Gender differences in research productivity: A bibliometric analysis of the Italian academic system. Scientometrics, 79(3), 517-539. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-007-2046-8eng
dcterms.referencesAbramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A. & Di Costa, F. (2009). Research collaboration and productivity: Is there correlation? Higher Education, 57, 155-171.eng
dcterms.referencesAdams, J. & Testa, J. (2011). Thomson Reuters bookcitationindex. In E. Noyons, P. Ngulube, & J. Leta (Eds.), The 13th conference of theinternationalsocietyforscientometrics and informetrics (pp. 13–18). Durban, South Africa: ISSI, Leiden University and University of Zululand.eng
dcterms.referencesBarrios, M., Villarroya, A. & Borrego, Á. (2013). Scientific production in psychology: a gender analysis. Scientometrics, 95(1), 15–23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192- 012-0816-4eng
dcterms.referencesBodin, Ö. & Crona, B. I. (2009). The role of social networks in natural resource governance: What relational patterns make a difference? Global Environmental Change, 19(3), 366-374.eng
dcterms.referencesColciencias - Departamento Administrativo de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (2015). El Estado de la Ciencias en Colombia. Disponible en: https://sites.google.com/a/colciencias.gov.co/estado-de-la-ciencia-2015/spa
dcterms.referencesFontainha, E., Martins, J.T. & Vasconcelos, A.C. (2015). Network analysis of a virtual community of learning of economics educators. In: Proceedings of ISIC, the Information Behaviour Conference, Leeds, 2-5 September, 2014: Part 2, (paper isic20). Retrieved from http://InformationR.net/ir/20-1/isic2/isic20.htmleng
dcterms.referencesFranceschet, M. & Costantini, A. (2010). The effect of scholar collaboration on impact and quality of academic papers. Journal of Informetrics, 4, 540-553.eng
dcterms.referencesGoel, K. (2002). Gender differences in publication productivity in psychology in India. Scientometrics, 55(2), 243–258. DOI: 10.1023/A:1019667708012eng
dcterms.referencesHawe, P., Webster, C. & Shiell, A. (2004). A glossary of terms for navigating the field of social network analysis. Journal Epidemiology Community Health, 58, 971-975.eng
dcterms.referencesHicks, D. (2004). The four literatures of social science. In: H. Moed., W. Glänzel., & U. Schmoch. (Eds.) Handbook of quantitative science and technology research (473-496). Netherland, Kluwer Academic Publishers.eng
dcterms.referencesLancho-Barrantes, B. S., Guerro-Bote, V. P. & Moya-Anegon, F. (2013). Citationincrementsbetweencollaboratingcountries. Scientometrics, 94, 817–831. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0797-3eng
dcterms.referencesLarivière, V., Sugimoto, C., Tsou, A. & Gingras, Y. (2015). Team size matters: Collaboration and scientific impact since 1900. Journal for the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(7), 1323-1332.eng
dcterms.referencesLebeau, L-M., Laframboise, M-C., Larivière, V. & Gingras, Y. (2008). The effect of universityindustry collaboration on the scientific impact of publications: The Canadian case, 1980-2005. Research Evaluation, 17(3), 227-232.eng
dcterms.referencesLow, Y., Ng, K. H., Kabir., Koh, M. A. & Sinnasamy, J. (2014). Trend and impact of internationalcollaboration in clinical medicine paperspublished in Malaysia. Scientometrics, 98(2), 1521–1533. DOI: 10.1007/S11192-013-1121-6eng
dcterms.referencesMauleón , E. (2006). Productivity, impact and publication habits by gender in the area of Materials Science, 66(1), 199-218. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0014-3eng
dcterms.referencesOzel, B., Kretschmer, H. & Kretschmer, T. (2014). Co-authorship pair distribution patterns by Gender. Scientometrics, 98(1), 703-723. DOI 10.1007/s11192-013-1145-yeng
dcterms.referencesPrpić, K. (2002). Gender and productivity differentials in science. Scientometrcis, 55(1), 27-58. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016046819457eng
dcterms.referencesPuuska, H., Muhonen, R. & Leino, Y. (2014). International and domesticco-publishing and theircitationimpact in different disciplines. Scientometric, 98(21), 823-839. DOI: 10.1007/S11192-013-1181-7eng
dcterms.referencesQi Dong, J., McCarthy, K. & Schoenmakers, W. (2017). How Central Is Too Central? Organizing Interorganizational Collaboration Networks for Breakthrough Innovation. The Journal of Porduct Innovation Management, 34(4), 526-542. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12384eng
dcterms.referencesRodríguez Gutiérrez, J. K., & Gómez Velasco, N. Y. (2017) Redes de coautoría como herramienta de evaluación de la producción científica de los grupos de investigación. Revista General de Información y Documentación, 27(2), 279-297.spa
dcterms.referencesSanz Menéndez, J. (2003). Análisis de redes sociales: o cómo representar las estructuras sociales subyacentes. Apuntes de Ciencia y Tecnología, 7, 20-29.spa
dcterms.referencesSanz-Valero, J., Casterá, V. & Wanden-Berghe C. (2014). Estudio bibliométrico de la producción científica publicada por la Revista Panamericana de Salud Pública en el período de 1997 a 2012. Revista Panamericana de Salud Pública, 35(2), 81-88.spa
dcterms.referencesShin, J. & Cummings, W. (2010). Multilevel analysis of academic publishing across disciplines: research preference, collaboration, and time on research. Scientometrics, 85(2), 581-594. DOI: 10.1007/S11192-010-0236-2eng
dcterms.referencesVan Arensbergen, P., Van Der Weijden, I. & Van Den Basilar, P. (2012). Gender differences in scientific productivity: a persisting phenomenon? Scientometrics, 93(3), 857-68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0712-yeng
dcterms.referencesVuong, Q-H., Ho, T. M., Vuong, T. T., Napier, N., Pham, H. H. & Nguyen, H. V. (2017). Gender, age, research experience, leading role and academic productivity of Vietnamese researchers in the social sciences and humanities: exploring a 2008-2017 Scopus dataset. European Science Editing, 43(3), 51-55. DOI:10.20316/ESE.2017.43.006eng
dcterms.referencesWang, C., Rondan, S., Fruin, M. & Xu, X. (2013). Knowledge Networks, Collaboration Networks, and Exploratory Innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 57(2), 454- 514. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0917spa
dcterms.referencesWray, K. B. (2002). The epistemic significance of collaborative research. Philosophy of Science, 69, 150-168.eng
dc.rights.accessrightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessspa


Ficheros en el ítem

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

  • Artículos [1351]
    Artículos científicos evaluados por pares

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional
Excepto si se señala otra cosa, la licencia del ítem se describe como Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional