The personal factors in scientific collaboration: views held by slovenian researchers
ABSTRACT Scientific collaboration (SC) has become a widespread feature of modern research work. While many social network studies address various aspects of SC, little attention has so far been given to the specific factors that motivate researchers to engage in SC at the individual level. In our article, we focus on the types and practices of SC that researchers in Slovenia engage in. We consider this topic by adopting a quantitative and qualitative methodological approach. The former was conducted through a web survey among active researchers, and the latter through in-depth interviews with a selected group of top researchers, i.e. intellectual leaders. Results show the extent of individual SC depends on the perceptions of researchers of the benefits of SC. Qualitative interviews additionally provide broader reflections on certain policy mechanisms that could better motivate Slovenian scientists to scientifically collaborate in the international arena.
Contemporary science is inconceivable without scientific cooperation. It is this that largely ensures its progress and the emergence of new areas and research methods. At the beginning of the 21st century, we can observe that scientific cooperation can influence not only the development of science itself, but also the system of international relations and political discourse. Scientists turn into ambassadors, who represent the achievements of their country on the international stage and build new contacts. Scientific diplomacy is becoming an important element of soft power in world politics. Its goal, in contrast to scientific cooperation, is no longer just the acquisition of new knowledge, but the development and deepening of cooperation itself. There are three main directions in scientific diplomacy: science in diplomacy, science for diplomacy, and diplomacy for science. We find vivid examples of the latter two directions, as well as their interconnection, in contemporary Russian-Spanish relations, in which close cooperation between universities and research centers of the two countries serves as an instrument of diplomacy to achieve common interests, including universal ones. The chapter examines the main areas of cooperation between the two countries in the scientific and technical sphere, and in the humanities.
With the aim of attempting to attain particular communicative goals, Communication Mobility (CM) can be suggested one of the key elements in the complex construct of professional communicative competence in terms of oral English proficiency. CM has been proposed as an ability to employ a set of specific communicative strategies to facilitate professional communication, particularly among non-native English speakers. This preliminary study aims to identify perceived CM levels among Thai and Russian professionals working in international companies; to investigate possible correlation between personal factors (i.e. age, work experience, their perceived level of oral English proficiency, frequency of their attendance at meetings conducted in English, and frequency of English usage in their workplace) and CM; to compare these factors and the conditions in which CM may be developed among these two groups; and to predict the possibility of the development of CM. The quantitative method was employed, and the responses to the specifically designed questionnaire were obtained from 60 participants. The findings revealed that Russian participants were rated as very good users of CM, while Thai participants were only rated as fair CM users. In general terms, for both groups, only the frequency of English language use in the workplace was found to correlate with the perceived CM. The frequency of English language use in their workplaces was the only factor for the Thai participants to predict the development of CM. Such findings help in designing ESP courses which attempt to simulate workplace communicative situations, often seen as problematic and uncertain.
The paper studies the dynamics of scientific collaborations in leading Russian universities during 2010–2018. The author analyzes both individual and inter-organizational collaboration. Understanding how scientific cooperation is organized, its disciplinary specifics and qualitative differences provides important information for organizing scientific activities in universities. Based on bibliometric data we analyze changes in the number of authors and affiliated organizations according to publications from various scientific fields and quality segments. The sampling of the universities shows the growth of scientific collaboration both among individual scientists and among organizations. The number of works co-authored with Russian organizations is higher than with foreign ones, but the share of such works is rapidly decreasing. In the segment of high quality publications, universities collaborate more often than in the lower quality segment. At the same time, in the high quality segment universities more often collaborate with foreign institutions, whereas in the lower quality segment – with Russian organizations. The highest share of scientific collaboration is observed in physical sciences, the lowest – in social sciences. The analysis is limited by the data, which do not represent all collaborations between scientists.
Changes in patterns of collaboration between Russian universities after the commencement of the Russian university excellence initiative (Project 5-100) are studied in this paper. While this project aimed to make leading Russian universities more globally competitive and improve their research productivity, it also happened to increase their cooperation. An analysis of affiliations and the co-authorship networks was conducted to explore scientific collaborations between and within the participating universities. Such analysis facilitates the investigation of the number of collaborations with other organizations, both domestic and international cooperation, and disciplinary differences. By analyzing the co-authorship networks, the position of universities in the academic network and the structure of collaborations among the participants were examined. A sample of 30 Russian universities, including participants in Project 5-100 and a control group of institutions with similar characteristics, was used. After joining the project, the participating universities increased both their cooperation with each other as well as with foreign universities and research institutions of the Russian Academy of Sciences, especially in the high-quality segment. At the same time, the collaboration patterns of non-participating universities did not change significantly. The centrality of Project 5-100 universities in the global academic network has increased, along with their visibility and coupling in the national network. The historical division between university and academic sectors has diminished, while the participating universities have started to play a more important role in knowledge production within the country.
Scientific collaboration is often not perfectly reciprocal. Scientifically strong countries/institutions/laboratories may help their less prominent partners with leading scholars, or finance, or other resources. What is interesting in such type of collaboration is that (1) it may be measured by bibliometrics and (2) it may shed more light on the scholarly level of both collaborating organizations themselves. In this sense measuring institutions in collaboration sometimes may tell more than attempts to assess them as stand-alone organizations. Evaluation of collaborative patterns was explained in detail, for example, by Glänzel (2001; 2003). Here we combine these methods with a new one, made available by separating ‘the best’ journals from ‘others’ on the same platform of Russian Index of Science Citation (RISC). Such sub-universes of journals from ‘different leagues’ provide additional methods to study how collaboration influences the quality of papers published by organizations.