BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Caroline S. Wagner

Caroline S. Wagner contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Digital LibrariesApplicationsSocial and Information Networkscs.CYphysics.soc-ph

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
7works
0followers
5topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

7 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

A discussion of measuring the top-1 percent most-highly cited publications: Quality and impact of Chinese papers

The top 1 percent most highly cited articles are watched closely as the vanguards of the sciences. Using Web of Science data, one can find that China had overtaken the USA in the relative participation in the top 1 percent in 2019, after outcompeting the EU on this indicator in 2015. However, this finding contrasts with repeated reports of Western agencies that the quality of Chinese output in science is lagging other advanced nations, even as it has caught up in numbers of articles. The difference between the results presented here and the previous results depends mainly upon field normalizations, which classify source journals by discipline. Average citation rates of these subsets are commonly used as a baseline so that one can compare among disciplines. However, the expected value of the top 1 percent of a sample of N papers is N 100, ceteris paribus. Using the average citation rates as expected values, errors are introduced by using the mean of highly skewed distributions and a specious precision in the delineations of the subsets. Classifications can be used for the decomposition, but not for the normalization. When the data is thus decomposed, the USA ranks ahead of China in biomedical fields such as virology. Although the number of papers is smaller, China outperforms the US in the field of Business and Finance in the Social Sciences Citation Index when p is less than .05. Using percentile ranks, subsets other than indexing based classifications can be tested for the statistical significance of differences among them.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Changes in co-publication patterns among China, the European Union (28) and the United States of America, 2016-2021

The COVID-19 global pandemic starting in January 2020 disrupted international collaborations in scholarly exchange, reducing mobility and connections across the globe. An examination of Web of Science-indexed publications from China, the European Union-28 and the United States of America shows a drop in publications numbers coming from the EU-28 and the United States in 2021. Importantly, cooperation between China and the United States drops without a corresponding drop between China and the EU-28. Moreover, the drop in China-USA cooperation can be seen beginning in 2019, before the pandemic, at a time when political tensions around science, technology, and innovation arose, with the United States claiming that China was violating intellectual property norms. The patterns suggest that political tensions, more than the pandemic, influenced the drop in China-USA cooperation.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2019arXiv

Between Promise and Performance: Science and Technology Policy Implementation through Network Governance

This research analyzes the effects of U.S. science and technology policy on the technological performance of organizations in a global strategic alliance network. During the mid-1980s the U.S. semiconductor industry appeared to be collapsing. Industry leaders and policymakers moved to support and protect U.S. firms by creating a program called Sematech. While many scholars regard Sematech as a success, how the program succeeded remains unclear. This study re-contextualizes Sematech as a network administrative organization which lowered cooperation costs and enhanced resource combination for innovation at the cutting edge. This study combines network analysis and longitudinal regression techniques to test the effects of public policy on organizational network position and technological performance in an unbalanced panel of semiconductor firms between 1986 and 2001. This research suggests governments might achieve policy through inter-organizational innovations aimed at the development and administration of robust governance networks.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2018arXiv

International Research Collaboration: Novelty, Conventionality, and Atypicality in Knowledge Recombination

Research articles produced through international collaboration are more highly cited than other work, but are they also more novel? Using measures developed by Uzzi et al. (2013), and replicated by Boyack and Klavans (2014), this article tests for novelty and conventionality in international research collaboration. Scholars have found that coauthored articles are more novel and have suggested that diverse groups have a greater chance of producing creative work. As such, we expected to find that international collaboration tends to produce more novel research. Using data from Web of Science and Scopus in 2005, we failed to show that international collaboration tends to produce more novel articles. In fact, international collaboration appears to produce less novel and more conventional knowledge combinations. Transaction costs and communication barriers to international collaboration may suppress novelty. Higher citations to international work may be explained by an audience effect, where more authors from more countries results in greater access to a larger citing community. The findings are consistent with explanations of growth in international collaboration that posit a social dynamic of preferential attachment based upon reputation.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

The European Union, China, and the United States in the Top-1% and Top-10% Layers of Most-Frequently-Cited Publications: Competition and Collaborations

The percentages of shares of world publications of the European Union and its member states, China, and the United States have been represented differently as a result of using different databases. An analytical variant of the Web-of-Science (of Thomson Reuters) enables us to study the dynamics in the world publication system in terms of the field-normalized top-1% and top-10% most-frequently-cited publications. Comparing the EU28, USA, and China at the global level shows a top-level dynamics that is different from the analysis in terms of shares of publications: the United States remains far more productive in the top-1% of all papers; China drops out of the competition for elite status; and the EU28 increased its share among the top-cited papers from 2000-2010. Some of the EU28 member states overtook the U.S. during this decade, but a clear divide remains between EU15 (Western Europe) and the Accession Countries. Network analysis shows that internationally co-authored top-1% publications perform far above expectation and also above top-10% ones. In 2005, China was embedded in this top-layer of internationally co-authored publications. These publications often involve more than a single European nation.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

An Integrated Impact Indicator (I3): A New Definition of "Impact" with Policy Relevance

Allocation of research funding, as well as promotion and tenure decisions, are increasingly made using indicators and impact factors drawn from citations to published work. A debate among scientometricians about proper normalization of citation counts has resolved with the creation of an Integrated Impact Indicator (I3) that solves a number of problems found among previously used indicators. The I3 applies non-parametric statistics using percentiles, allowing highly-cited papers to be weighted more than less-cited ones. It further allows unbundling of venues (i.e., journals or databases) at the article level. Measures at the article level can be re-aggregated in terms of units of evaluation. At the venue level, the I3 creates a properly weighted alternative to the journal impact factor. I3 has the added advantage of enabling and quantifying classifications such as the six percentile rank classes used by the National Science Board's Science & Engineering Indicators.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access