Instituto de Políticas y Bienes Públicos (IPP), Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC), Madrid, Spain.
School of Informatics and Computing, Indiana University Bloomington, Bloomington, Indiana, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2019 Jun 20;14(6):e0218309. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218309. eCollection 2019.
National contributions to science are influenced by a number of factors, including economic capacity, national scientific priorities, science policy, and institutional settings and cultures. Nations do not have equal opportunities to access the global scientific market, and therefore, often seek out international partners with complementary resources and expertise. This study aims at investigating national collaboration strategies, with a focus on research leadership-measured through corresponding authorship-and its relationship with scientific impact. Results show that countries with higher R&D investments are more scientifically independent, and confirm that international collaboration is positively related to citation impact. However, leadership in international collaboration is inversely related with a countries' share of international collaboration and there is a very little relationship between citation impact and international leadership. For instance, most countries-and particularly those that have fewer resources-have higher scientific impact when they are not leading. This suggests that, despite increasing global participation in science, most international collaborations are asymmetrical, and that the research system remains structured around a few dominate nations.
国家对科学的贡献受到多种因素的影响，包括经济实力、国家科学优先事项、科学政策以及体制设置和文化。各国在获取全球科学市场的机会方面并不均等，因此，它们通常会寻求拥有互补资源和专业知识的国际合作伙伴。本研究旨在调查国家合作策略，重点关注通过相应作者身份衡量的研究领导力及其与科学影响力的关系。结果表明，研发投入较高的国家在科学上更加独立，并证实国际合作与引文影响力呈正相关。然而，国际合作中的领导地位与一个国家在国际合作中的份额成反比，引文影响力与国际领导地位之间的关系也很小。例如，大多数国家——特别是那些资源较少的国家——在不处于领先地位时具有更高的科学影响力。这表明，尽管全球参与科学的程度不断提高，但大多数国际合作是不对称的，而且研究体系仍然围绕着少数主导国家构建。
