Redes de cooperación entre autores e instituciones en Ciencias Sociales dentro del modelo científico colombiano: comparación por género y área del conocimiento
| dc.contributor.author | Ávila-Toscano, José Hernando | |
| dc.contributor.author | Marenco-Escuderos, Ailed Daniela | |
| dc.contributor.author | Romero-Pérez, Ivón Katherine | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2019-07-09T22:27:24Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2019-07-09T22:27:24Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2019 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Este 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.abstract | This 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.identifier.issn | 11321873 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12442/3486 | |
| dc.language.iso | spa | spa |
| dc.publisher | Ediciones Complutense | spa |
| dc.rights | Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional | eng |
| dc.rights.accessrights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | spa |
| dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ | |
| dc.source | Revista General de Información y Documentación | spa |
| dc.source | Vol. 29, N° 1 (2019) | spa |
| dc.source.uri | https://dx.doi.org/10.5209/rgid.64545 | spa |
| dc.subject | Redes de cooperación | spa |
| dc.subject | Género | spa |
| dc.subject | Ciencias sociales | spa |
| dc.subject | Instituciones | spa |
| dc.subject | Cooperation networks | eng |
| dc.subject | Gender | eng |
| dc.subject | Social sciences | eng |
| dc.subject | Institutions | eng |
| dc.title | Redes de cooperación entre autores e instituciones en Ciencias Sociales dentro del modelo científico colombiano: comparación por género y área del conocimiento | spa |
| dc.title.alternative | Cooperation networks between authors and institutions in Social Sciences within the Colombian scientific model: comparison by gender and area of knowledge | eng |
| dc.type | article | spa |
| dcterms.references | Abramo, 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/s11192-007-2046-8 | eng |
| dcterms.references | Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A. & Di Costa, F. (2009). Research collaboration and productivity: Is there correlation? Higher Education, 57, 155-171. | eng |
| dcterms.references | Adams, 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.references | Barrios, 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- 012-0816-4 | eng |
| dcterms.references | Bodin, 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.references | Colciencias - 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.references | Fontainha, 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.html | eng |
| dcterms.references | Franceschet, M. & Costantini, A. (2010). The effect of scholar collaboration on impact and quality of academic papers. Journal of Informetrics, 4, 540-553. | eng |
| dcterms.references | Goel, K. (2002). Gender differences in publication productivity in psychology in India. Scientometrics, 55(2), 243–258. DOI: 10.1023/A:1019667708012 | eng |
| dcterms.references | Hawe, 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.references | Hicks, 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.references | Lancho-Barrantes, B. S., Guerro-Bote, V. P. & Moya-Anegon, F. (2013). Citationincrementsbetweencollaboratingcountries. Scientometrics, 94, 817–831. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0797-3 | eng |
| dcterms.references | Larivière, 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.references | Lebeau, 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.references | Low, 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/S11192-013-1121-6 | eng |
| dcterms.references | Mauleón , 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/s11192-006-0014-3 | eng |
| dcterms.references | Ozel, B., Kretschmer, H. & Kretschmer, T. (2014). Co-authorship pair distribution patterns by Gender. Scientometrics, 98(1), 703-723. DOI 10.1007/s11192-013-1145-y | eng |
| dcterms.references | Prpić, K. (2002). Gender and productivity differentials in science. Scientometrcis, 55(1), 27-58. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016046819457 | eng |
| dcterms.references | Puuska, H., Muhonen, R. & Leino, Y. (2014). International and domesticco-publishing and theircitationimpact in different disciplines. Scientometric, 98(21), 823-839. DOI: 10.1007/S11192-013-1181-7 | eng |
| dcterms.references | Qi 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.12384 | eng |
| dcterms.references | Rodríguez 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.references | Sanz Menéndez, J. (2003). Análisis de redes sociales: o cómo representar las estructuras sociales subyacentes. Apuntes de Ciencia y Tecnología, 7, 20-29. | spa |
| dcterms.references | Sanz-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.references | Shin, 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/S11192-010-0236-2 | eng |
| dcterms.references | Van 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-y | eng |
| dcterms.references | Vuong, 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.2017.43.006 | eng |
| dcterms.references | Wang, 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.2011.0917 | spa |
| dcterms.references | Wray, K. B. (2002). The epistemic significance of collaborative research. Philosophy of Science, 69, 150-168. | eng |