Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T22:28:54.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Are Two (or Three or Four … or Nine) Heads Better than One? Collaboration, Multidisciplinarity, and Publishability

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 June 2009

Lee Sigelman
Lee Sigelman
Affiliation:
The George Washington University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although collaborative research has become much more common in the social sciences, including political science, little is known about the consequences of collaboration. This article uses papers submitted to the American Political Science Review to assess whether the widely acknowledged benefits of collaboration produced papers that were more likely to be accepted for publication. The results indicate that collaboration per se made little or no difference, but that the disciplinary configuration of the authors did result in differences in the success of these submissions.

Type
The Profession
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 42 , Issue 3 , July 2009 , pp. 507 - 512
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barnett, Andy H., Ault, Richard W., and Kaserman, David L.. 1988. “The Rising Incidence of Co-authorship in Economics: Further Evidence.” Review of Economics and Statistics 70 (3): 539–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baum, William C., Griffiths, G.N., Matthews, Robert, and Scherruble, Daniel. 1976. “American Political Science before the Mirror: What our Journals Reveal about the Profession.” Journal of Politics 38 (November): 895–917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bridgstock, Martin. 1991. “The Quality of Single and Multiple Authored Papers: An Unresolved Problem.” Scientometrics 21 (1): 37–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cummings, Jonathon N. 2005. “Collaborative Research across Disciplinary and Organizational Boundaries.” Social Studies of Science 35 (5): 703–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Maio, Gerald, and Kushner, Harvey W.. 1981. “Quantification and Multiple Authorships in Political Science.” Journal of Politics 43 (February): 181–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durden, Garey C., and Perri, Timothy J.. 1995. “Coauthorship and Publication Efficiency.” Atlantic Economic Journal 23 (1): 69–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Endersby, James W. 1996. “Collaborative Research in the Social Sciences: Multiple Authorship and Publication Credit.” Social Science Quarterly 77 (June): 375–92.Google Scholar
Fisher, Bonnie S., Cobane, Craig T., Vander Ven, Thomas M., and Cullen, Francis T.. 1998. “How Many Authors Does it Take to Publish an Article? Trends and Patterns in Political Science.” PS: Political Science and Politics 31 (December): 847–56.Google Scholar
Hudson, John. 1996. “Trends in Multi-authored Papers in Economics.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 10 (3): 153–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Gary, and Zeng, Langche. 2001. “Logistic Regression in Rare Events Data.” Political Analysis 9 (2): 137–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laband, David N., and Tollison, Robert D.. 2000. “Intellectual Collaboration.” Journal of Political Economy 108 (June): 632–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moody, James. 2004. “The Structure of a Social Science Collaboration Network: Disciplinary Cohesion from 1963–1999.” American Sociological Review 69 (2): 213–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Presser, Stanley. 1980. “Collaboration and the Quality of Research.” Social Studies of Science 10 (February): 95–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, Derek J. de Solla. 1963. Little Science, Big Science. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar