Academic collaboration network: the case of co authorships of the articles presented at the Permanent Academic Conference on Research Accounting –Capic– Chile, (1993-2015)
Published 2016-12-10
Keywords
- Networks analysis,
- CAPIC,
- co-authorship,
- research networks
How to Cite
Abstract
Currently, support for university scientific production focuses on networking creation. In the same spirit, the year 1990, Scientific Society CAPIC, Permanent Academic Conference on Research Accounting, was created. This institution houses primarily academics attached to Chilean universities, both public and private. In this context, the purpose of this research is related to identify to what extent the participation of investigators in CAPIC, during the period 1992-2015 has generated collaborative networks, and also to identify the main attributes and internal structures of such networks.
The findings clearly demonstrate that the macro network generated during the last two decades has low cohesion with high fragmentation, and a prevalence of the male gender. From a micro perspective, the analysis of the eight main networks, evidences a prevalence of certain universities, being the micro network of Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso the one with a greater number of participants. Furthermore, it is observed that relevant positions concerning connection and closeness are being assumed by women; even when the male gender predominates in most networks.
Finally, another result is associated to the existence of a micro network internationally connected, in particular with researchers from Colombia, Argentina y Chile. Future research should focus on the identification of the networks capitals with the aim to display and manage such resources –economic, intellectual, cultural and social resources– to promote connectivity between researchers with common interests, facilitating the localization of networks with structural advantages that promote a higher productivity among the academics participating in CAPIC.
Downloads
References
2. Borgatti, S., Everett, M., y Freeman, L. (2002). Ucinet 6 for Windows: Software for social network analysis. Harvard: Analytic Technologies.
3. Bourdieu, P. (1997). Capital cultural, escuela y espacio social. Siglo XXI, México.
4. Bourdieu, P. (2001). El capital social. Apuntes provisionales. Zona abierta, n° 94-95, pp. 83-87.
5. Cárdenas, M. (2016). Sustentabilidad y redes de conocimiento. Análisis con la teoría de grafos. Publicaciones Empresariales UNAM FCA Publishing, México, distrito Federal.
6. Gaete, J., y Vásquez, J. (2008). Conocimiento y estructura en la investigación académica: una aproximación desde el análisis de redes sociales. REDES – Revista hispana para el análisis de redes sociales, 14(5), pp. 1-20.
7. González, I. (2008). Fragmento de la historia y protagonistas de Capic. Capic Review, n° 6, pp. 1-7.
8. Olmeda, C., Perianes, A., y Ovalle, M. (2008). Estructura de las redes de colaboración científica entre las universidades españolas. Revista de sistemas de información y documentación, número monográfico, pp. 129-140.
9. Sanz, L. (2003). Análisis de redes sociales: o cómo representar las estructuras sociales subyacentes. Apuntes de Ciencia y Tecnología, 7, 21-29.
10. Wasserman, S., y Faust, K. (2009). Social network analysis. Methods and applications. Cambridge University Press, New York.
11. Lu, H., y Feng, Y. (2008). A measure of authors’ centrality in co-authorship networks based on the distribution of collaborative relationships. Scientometrics, 8(2), pp. 499-511.
