Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
Update search
NARROW
Format
Journal
Date
Availability
1-5 of 5
Cassidy R. Sugimoto
Close
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Sort by
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Quantitative Science Studies (2023) 4 (2): 442–465.
Published: 01 May 2023
FIGURES
| View All (10)
Abstract
View articletitled, Impact of geographic diversity on citation of collaborative research
View
PDF
for article titled, Impact of geographic diversity on citation of collaborative research
Diversity in human capital is widely seen as critical to creating holistic and high-quality research, especially in areas that engage with diverse cultures, environments, and challenges. Quantification of diverse academic collaborations and their effect on research quality is lacking, especially at international scale and across different domains. Here, we present the first effort to measure the impact of geographic diversity in coauthorships on the citation of their papers across different academic domains. Our results unequivocally show that geographic coauthor diversity improves paper citation, but very long distance collaborations have variable impact. We also discover “well-trodden” collaboration circles that yield much less impact than similar travel distances. These relationships are observed to exist across different subject areas, but with varying strengths. These findings can help academics identify new opportunities from a diversity perspective, as well as inform funders on areas that require additional mobility support.
Includes: Supplementary data
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Quantitative Science Studies (2021) 2 (3): 845–863.
Published: 05 November 2021
FIGURES
| View All (5)
Abstract
View articletitled, Credibility of scientific information on social media: Variation by platform, genre and presence of formal credibility cues
View
PDF
for article titled, Credibility of scientific information on social media: Variation by platform, genre and presence of formal credibility cues
Responding to calls to take a more active role in communicating their research findings, scientists are increasingly using open online platforms, such as Twitter, to engage in science communication or to publicize their work. Given the ease with which misinformation spreads on these platforms, it is important for scientists to present their findings in a manner that appears credible. To examine the extent to which the online presentation of science information relates to its perceived credibility, we designed and conducted two surveys on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. In the first survey, participants rated the credibility of science information on Twitter compared with the same information in other media, and in the second, participants rated the credibility of tweets with modified characteristics: presence of an image, text sentiment, and the number of likes/retweets. We find that similar information about scientific findings is perceived as less credible when presented on Twitter compared to other platforms, and that perceived credibility increases when presented with recognizable features of a scientific article. On a platform as widely distrusted as Twitter, use of these features may allow researchers who regularly use Twitter for research-related networking and communication to present their findings in the most credible formats.
Includes: Supplementary data
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Quantitative Science Studies (2021) 2 (1): 111–128.
Published: 08 April 2021
FIGURES
| View All (6)
Abstract
View articletitled, Investigating the division of scientific labor using the Contributor
Roles Taxonomy (CRediT)
View
PDF
for article titled, Investigating the division of scientific labor using the Contributor
Roles Taxonomy (CRediT)
Contributorship statements were introduced by scholarly journals in the late 1990s to provide more details on the specific contributions made by authors to research papers. After more than a decade of idiosyncratic taxonomies by journals, a partnership between medical journals and standards organizations has led to the establishment, in 2015, of the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT), which provides a standardized set of 14 research contributions. Using the data from Public Library of Science (PLOS) journals over the 2017–2018 period ( N = 30,054 papers), this paper analyzes how research contributions are divided across research teams, focusing on the association between division of labor and number of authors, and authors’ position and specific contributions. It also assesses whether some contributions are more likely to be performed in conjunction with others and examines how the new taxonomy provides greater insight into the gendered nature of labor division. The paper concludes with a discussion of results with respect to current issues in research evaluation, science policy, and responsible research practices.
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Quantitative Science Studies (2021) 2 (1): 327–334.
Published: 08 April 2021
FIGURES
Abstract
View articletitled, The institutionalized stratification of the Chinese higher education
system
View
PDF
for article titled, The institutionalized stratification of the Chinese higher education
system
To promote research excellence, China’s government has been offering substantial financial support for a small group of selected universities through three national research programs (Project 211, Project 985, Double First Class). However, admission to these programs may not be completely merit based. Based on a statistical analysis of Chinese universities’ scientific activities, this paper shows that this institutionalized hierarchy is not supported by empirical data on research performance, which contributes to inequalities and inefficiencies in Chinese higher education. To build and maintain research capacity, China must support meritocracy across the research system.
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Quantitative Science Studies (2020) 1 (1): 1–3.
Published: 01 February 2020