Networks of international co-authorship in journal articles about Antarctic research, 1998–2015
This study seeks insight into the social structure of Antarctic research from 1998 to 2015 by examining peer-reviewed journal articles listed in the Science Citation Index of the Web of Science database. This study identifies leading countries in peer-reviewed journal article output and applies soci...
| Published in: | Polar Research |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Norwegian Polar Institute
2020
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.33265/polar.v39.3647 https://doaj.org/article/4161ea4f8b8e4fb4ad8f3a44168c632e |
| Summary: | This study seeks insight into the social structure of Antarctic research from 1998 to 2015 by examining peer-reviewed journal articles listed in the Science Citation Index of the Web of Science database. This study identifies leading countries in peer-reviewed journal article output and applies social network analysis methods to identify countries where authors are collaborating with those affiliated with organizations in different countries. The results show that the number of publications on Antarctica and the proportion of international research collaboration increased from 23.0 to 33.2% during the period of time being considered. The number of articles published by authors affiliated with institutions in emerging countries such as China, Turkey, Brazil and South Korea rose, whereas the proportion of articles published by authors affiliated with institutions in the United States decreased. The largest proportion of academic publications pertaining to Antarctic research was within the natural sciences. Within this broad field, the majority of publications fell within Earth and related environmental sciences and the biological sciences. Social network analysis shows that Antarctic research moved towards a network, in which researchers are internationally more connected than ever before, with countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, France and Australia in central positions. Sweden, Belgium and the Netherlands did not account for a high percentage of academic contributions but were still notable for their multinational collaborative research. |
|---|