4.5 Article

Scientific collaboration in Brazilian researches: a comparative study in the information science, mathematics and dentistry fields

期刊

SCIENTOMETRICS
卷 113, 期 2, 页码 929-950

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-017-2498-4

关键词

Scientific collaboration; Research collaboration; Co-authorship; Collaboration in science; Self-organization in science

资金

  1. National Counsel of Technological and Scientific Development (CNPq)
  2. Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Level -or Education- Personnel (CAPES)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study attempts to describe, in a comparative way, scientific collaboration and co-authoring activities and understanding of Brazilian researchers of productivity level 1 at the National Counsel of Technological and Scientific Development (CNPq). In order to do so, a questionnaire was sent to the researchers of productivity level 1 at CNPq in the Mathematics, Dentistry and Information Science fields, with questions about scientific collaboration and co-authoring activities. We analyzed the scientific production of the researchers who answered the questionnaire and we have identified that 78% of the participants consider that scientific collaboration and co-authorship are different activities, and the potential and usual number of research collaborators is between 2 and 3 in Mathematics and Information Science, and between 5 and 6 collaborators in Dentistry. Differences among fields were pointed out by identifying main collaborators and co-authors. The reasons for collaborating vary according to the nature of the research, however, the percentages are high in these three areas: training of researchers and students, desire to increase their own experience through the experience of others and increased productivity. From the analysis of the scientific production declared in their Lattes Curriculum, we have found that the average number of authors per publication in the field of Information Science is 2.2 authors, in Mathematics is 2.8 authors per publication, and in Dentistry the average is 5.3 authors per publication. We have concluded that scientific collaboration and co-authorship are terms assigned to different activities for the analyzed fields.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据