The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The rise in co-authorship in the social sciences (1980–2013)
Open accessAbstract
This article examines the rise in co-authorship in the Social Sciences over a 34-year period. It investigates the development in co-authorship in different research fields and discusses how the methodological differences in these research fields together with changes in academia affect the tendency to co-author articles. The study is based on bibliographic data about 4.5 million peer review articles published in the period 1980–2013 and indexed in the 56 subject categories of the Web of Science’s Social Science Citation Index. The results show a rise in the average number of authors, share of co-authored and international co-authored articles in the majority of the subject categories. However, the results also show that there are great disciplinary differences to the extent of the rises in co-authorship. The subject categories with a great share of international co-authored articles have generally experienced an increase in co-authorship, but increasing international collaboration is not the only factor influencing the rise in co-authorship. Hence, the most substantial rises have occurred in subject categories, where the research often is based on the use of experiments, large data set, statistical methods and/or team-production models.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Knowledge production in HSS is, therefore, a traditionally solo affair, and while this has changed significantly over the past four decades as social scientists increasingly collaborate and publish together (Henriksen, 2016), PhD research continues to be individual in most HSS doctoral programs, as a single PhD student develops and carries out a research project that forms the thesis.”
From Assessing the person or the project? How disciplinary ontological and epistemological assumptions shape doctoral admissions in elite UK institutions (2026) · cites this paper as Henriksen, 2016
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior
Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. (2008) · Journal of Documentation · doi:10.1108/00220410810844150 · Cited by 1,607
Cronin, B. (2001) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.1097 · Cited by 500
Cited by
Bond, M., Zawacki‐Richter, O., & Nichols, M. (2019) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.12730 · Cited by 243
Inouye, K., Robson, J., Anaiz, P. R., Baker, S., & Ilie, S. (2026) · Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s10734-025-01438-8 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Henriksen, D.
- Venue
- Scientometrics
- Published
- 2016-01-30
- Volume
- 107
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 455-476
- ISSN
- 0138-9130 (ISSN-L)
- 1588-2861
- OpenAlex
- W2273395868
- Cited by
- 265
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 16.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.