Abstract
The aim of this paper is to explore the power-law relationship between citation-based performance (CBP) and co-authorship patterns for papers in management journals by analyzing its behavior according to the type of documents (articles and reviews) and the number of pages of documents. We analyzed 36,241 papers that received 239,172 citations. The scaling exponent of CBP for article papers was larger than for reviews. Citations to articles increased 21.67 or 3.18 times each time the number of article papers published in a year in management journals doubled. The citations to reviews increased 21.29 or 2.45 times each time the number of reviews published in a year in management journals doubled. The scaling exponent for the power-law relationship of citation-based performance according to number of pages of papers was 1.44 ± 0.05 for articles and 1.25 ± 0.05 for reviews. The citations to articles increased faster than citation to reviews. The scaling exponent for the power-law of citation-based performance to co-authored articles was higher than single-authored articles. For reviews the scaling exponent was the same for the relationship between citation based performance and the number of reviews. Citations increased faster in single authored reviews than co-authored reviews.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adams, J., & Gurney, K. (2013). Leading research economies in a changing knowledge network. Spain. Global research digest. Retrieved from http://www.researchanalytics.thomsonreuters.com/grr.
Aman, V. (2016). How collaboration impacts citation flows within the German science system. Scientometrics, 109(3), 2195–2216. doi:10.1007/s11192-016-2092-1.
Archambault, E., Beauchesne, O., Côté, G., & Roberge, G. (2011). Scale-adjusted metrics of scientific collaboration. In Paper presented at the 13th international conference of the international society for scientometrics and informetrics Durban, South Africa. Retrieved from http://www.science-metrix.com/pdf/Scale_Adjusted_Metrics_of_Scientific_Collaboration.pdf.
ASCB. (2015). San Francisco declaration on research assessment: Putting science into the assessment of research. Retrieved from http://www.ascb.org/files/SFDeclarationFINAL.pdf.
Ausloos, M. (2013). A scientometrics law about co-authors and their ranking: the co-author core. Scientometrics, 95(3), 895–909. doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0936-x.
Brzezinski, M. (2015). Power laws in citation distributions: evidence from Scopus. Scientometrics, 103(1), 213–228. doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1524-z.
Clauset, A., Shalizi, C. R., & Newman, M. E. J. (2009). Power-law distributions in empirical data. SIAM Review, 51(4), 661–703.
Coccia, M., & Bozeman, B. (2016). Allometric models to measure and analyze the evolution of international research collaboration. Scientometrics, 108(3), 1065–1084. doi:10.1007/s11192-016-2027-x.
Costa, M. R., Qin, J., & Bratt, S. (2016). Emergence of collaboration networks around large scale data repositories: A study of the genomics community using GenBank. Scientometrics, 108(1), 21–40. doi:10.1007/s11192-016-1954-x.
de Solla-Price, D. J. (1963). Little science, big science. New York: Collumbia Press.
de Solla-Price, D. J. (1976). A general theory of bibliometric and other cumulative advantage processes. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 27(5), 292–306.
Falagas, M. E., Zarkali, A., Karageorgopoulos, D. E., Bardakas, V., & Mavros, M. N. (2014). The impact of article length on the number of future citations: A bibliometric analysis of general medicine journals. PLoS ONE, 8(2), 1–8. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0049476.t001.
Gazni, A., & Thelwall, M. (2016). The citation impact of collaboration between top institutions: A temporal analysis. Research Evaluation, 25(2), 219–229. doi:10.1093/reseval/rvv039.
González-Teruel, A., González-Alcaide, G., Barrios, M., & Abad-García, M.-F. (2015). Mapping recent information behavior research: An analysis of co-authorship and co-citation networks. Scientometrics, 103(2), 687–705. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1548-z.
Hartley, J. (2015). Is it true that papers written by joint-authors are cited more than papers written by single ones? What else matters? Scientometrics, 106(2), 817–818. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1799-8.
Katz, J. S. (1999). The self-similar science system. Research Policy, 28(5), 501–517.
Katz, J. S. (2000). Scale-independent indicators and research evaluation. Science and Public Policy, 27(1), 23–36.
Katz, J. S. (2005). Scale-independent bibliometric indicators. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 3(1), 24–28.
Katz, J. S. (2006). Indicators for complex innovation systems. Research Policy, 35(7), 893–909. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2006.03.007.
Katz, J. S. (2012). Scale-independent measures: Theory and practice. Retrieved from http://www.sussex.ac.uk/spru/jskatz.
Katz, J. S. (2016). What is a complex innovation system? PLoS ONE, 11(6), e0156150. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0156150.
Katz, J. S., & Cothey, V. (2006). Web indicators for complex innovation systems. Research Evaluation, 14(2), 85–95.
Ketcham, C. M., & Crawford, J. M. (2007). The impact of review articles. Laboratory Investigation, 87(12), 1174–1185. doi:10.1038/labinvest.3700688.
Khor, K. A., & Yu, L. G. (2016). Influence of international co-authorship on the research citation impact of young universities. Scientometrics, 107(3), 1095–1110. doi:10.1007/s11192-016-1905-6.
Leguendre, P., & Leguendre, L. (2012). Numerical ecology (3rd ed., Vol. 24). Great Britain: Elsevier B. V.
Levitt, J. M., & Thelwall, M. (2016). Long term productivity and collaboration in information science. Scientometrics, 108(3), 1103–1117. doi:10.1007/s11192-016-2061-8.
López-Navarro, I., Moreno, A. I., Quintanilla, M. Á., & Rey-Rocha, J. (2015). Why do I publish research articles in English instead of my own language? Differences in Spanish researchers’ motivations across scientific domains. Scientometrics, 103(3), 939–976. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1570-1.
Mabe, M. (2003). The growth and number of journals. Serials, 16(2), 191–197.
Mingers, J. (2008). Measuring the research contribution of management academics using the Hirsch-index. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 60(9), 1143–1153. doi:10.1057/jors.2008.94.
Mingers, J., & Burrell, Q. L. (2006). Modeling citation behavior in Management Science journals. Information Processing and Management, 42(6), 1451–1464. doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2006.03.012.
Mingers, J., & Lipitakis, E. A. E. C. G. (2010). Counting the citations: a comparison of Web of Science and Google Scholar in the field of business and management. Scientometrics, 85(2), 613–625. doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0270-0.
Mingers, J., & Xu, F. (2010). The drivers of citations in management science journals. European Journal of Operational Research, 205(2), 422–430. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2009.12.008.
Newman, M. E. J. (2005). Power laws, Pareto distributions and Zipf’s law. Contemporary Physics, 46(5), 323–351. doi:10.1080/00107510500052444.
Ronda-Pupo, G. A., & Diaz-Contreras, C. (2014). Relationship between the impact of Latin American articles on management and the language in which they appear. Interciencia, 39(9), 1–9.
Ronda-Pupo, G. A., & Katz, J. S. (2016a). The power-law relationship between citation-based performance and collaboration in articles in management journals: A scale-independent approach. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(10), 2565–2572. doi:10.1002/asi.23575.
Ronda-Pupo, G. A., & Katz, J. S. (2016b). The scaling relationship between citation-based performance and international collaboration of Cuban articles in natural sciences. Scientometrics, 107(3), 1423–1434. doi:10.1007/s11192-016-1939-9.
Ronda-Pupo, G. A., & Katz, J. S. (2016c). The scaling relationship between citation-based performance and scientific collaboration in natural sciences. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. arXiv:1510.05266 [cs.DL]
Rousseau, R., & Ding, J. (2016). Does international collaboration yield a higher citation potential for US scientists publishing in highly visible interdisciplinary Journals? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(4), 1009–1013. doi:10.1002/asi.23565.
Sahal, D. (1981). Patterns of technological innovation. New York: Addison-Wesley.
Smith, R. J. (2009). Use and misuse of the reduced major axis for line-fitting. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 140(3), 476–486. doi:10.1002/ajpa.21090.
Thijs, B., Costas, R., & Glänzel, W. (2015). Multi-authorship and citation advantage, a mythical relationship. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279286577_Multi-authorship_and_citation_advantage_a_mythical_relationship.
Tietze, S., & Dick, P. (2012). The victorious English language: Hegemonic practices in the management academy. Journal of Management Inquiry, 22(1), 122–134. doi:10.1177/1056492612444316.
van Raan, A. F. J. (2013). Universities scale like cities. Plos ONE, 8(3), e59384. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0059384.
Wang, L., Thijs, B., & Glänzel, W. (2015). Characteristics of international collaboration in sport sciences publications and its influence on citation impact. Scientometrics, 105(2), 843–862. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1735-y.
Zhang, Y., Chen, K., Zhu, G., Yam, R. C. M., & Guan, J. (2016). Inter-organizational scientific collaborations and policy effects: An ego-network evolutionary perspective of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Scientometrics, 108(3), 1383–1415. doi:10.1007/s11192-016-2022-2.
Acknowledgements
I want to express my gratitude to Professor J. Sylvan Katz for introducing me in the study of power law behavior, and the importance of using scale invariant indicators with research evaluation purposes. To an anonymous reviewer for his/her insightful recommendations on a previous version of the manuscript which helped to improve the methods and results. To Professor David Warton for advice on the use of Smatr 3 routines.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ronda-Pupo, G.A. The effect of document types and sizes on the scaling relationship between citations and co-authorship patterns in management journals. Scientometrics 110, 1191–1207 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2231-8
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2231-8