Skip to search boxSkip to navigationSkip to main content

Research collaboration experiences, good and bad: Dispatches from the front lines

  • Barry Bozeman(corresponding author)
    ,
  • Monica Gaughan
    ,
  • Jan Youtie
    ,
  • ,
  • Heather Rimes
*Corresponding author for this work
Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Abstract

The scant literature on individual scientists collaboration dynamics is used to develop a provisional model of research collaboration effectiveness. It incorporates external, collaborator, and team management factors, forming the basis for our theoretically informed qualitative analysis. We use this provisional model to guide semi-structured interview themes, deriving data from 60 US academic researchers, selected from a range of scientific and engineering disciplines as well as one social sciences discipline (economics). We present our findings in the form of respondent quotations related to the provisional model. We then conduct a further content analysis on the organizing constructs of respondent-assessed good and bad collaboration responses. The results of this second thematic coding of the interview data form the basis for the refinement of our model to include additional indicators, and to discuss some preliminary expectations about the associative relationships among the external, collaborator, and team management factors that contribute to scientist collaboration.

Publication Information

Output type

Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Original language

English (US)

Pages from-to (Number of pages)

Pages 226-244 (19 pages)

Journal (Volume, Issue Number)

Science and Public Policy (Volume 43, Issue 2)

Publication milestones

  • Published - 04/01/2016

Publication status

Published - 04/01/2016

ISSN

0302-3427

Publication IDs

  • Scopus: 84964749530

Publication metrics

Metrics

Scopus
citations
SciVal
FWCI
3.65
SciVal
Author count
5
SciVal
citations
42
SciVal
Paper percentile
95
SciVal
Top percentile
5
Fractional count
1
Fractional count
0.20
Fractional count
4
Fractional count
0.80
Fractional count
1
Fractional count
1

PlumX, opens in new tab

Captures
173
Citation count
86