The Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge
Abstract
We have used 19.9 million papers over 5 decades and 2.1 million patents to demonstrate that teams increasingly dominate solo authors in the production of knowledge. Research is increasingly done in teams across nearly all fields. Teams typically produce more frequently cited research than individuals do, and this advantage has been increasing over time. Teams now also produce the exceptionally high-impact research, even where that distinction was once the domain of solo authors. These results are detailed for sciences and engineering, social sciences, arts and humanities, and patents, suggesting that the process of knowledge creation has fundamentally changed.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Scientific knowledge is increasingly produced by teams.
“With scientific knowledge increasingly being generated by teams (Wuchty et al. 2007)”
From Creating and maintaining high‐performing collaborative research teams: the importance of diversity and interpersonal skills (2014) · cites this paper as Wuchty et al. 2007
Highly cited papers are increasingly authored by teams rather than individual researchers.
“In fact, the most highly cited papers are increasingly being produced by teams rather than solo researchers (Wuchty et al. 2007)”
From Creating and maintaining high‐performing collaborative research teams: the importance of diversity and interpersonal skills (2014) · cites this paper as Wuchty et al. 2007
Cites
The Matthew Effect in Science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered.
Merton, R. K. (1968) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.159.3810.56 · Cited by 6,720 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Fortunato, S., Bergstrom, C. T., Börner, K., Evans, J. A., Helbing, D., Milojević, S., Petersen, A. M., Radicchi, F., Sinatra, R., Uzzi, B., et al. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aao0185 · Cited by 1,497 · see citing works
“1 million patents reveals a nearly universal shift toward teams in all branches of science (50) (Fig.”
Self-citationA review of the literature on citation impact indicators
Waltman, L. (2016) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.007 · Cited by 1,356 · see citing works
Rebooting psychotherapy research and practice to reduce the burden of mental illness
Kazdin, A. E., & Blase, S. L. (2011) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691610393527 · Cited by 1,254 · see citing works
The Burden of Knowledge and the “Death of the Renaissance Man”: Is Innovation Getting Harder?
JONES, B. F. (2009) · Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.1111/j.1467-937x.2008.00531.x · Cited by 1,058 · see citing works
Self-citationPapers and patents are becoming less disruptive over time
Park, M., Leahey, E., & Funk, R. J. (2023) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05543-x · Cited by 899 · see citing works
Multi-University Research Teams: Shifting Impact, Geography, and Stratification in Science
Jones, B. F., Wuchty, S., & Uzzi, B. (2008) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1158357 · Cited by 812 · see citing works
Self-citationChemers, M. M., Zurbriggen, E. L., Syed, M., Goza, B. K., & Bearman, S. (2011) · Journal of Social Issues · doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2011.01710.x · Cited by 757 · see citing works
Superstar Extinction<sup>*</sup>
Azoulay, P., Zivin, J. S. G., & Wang, J. (2010) · Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/qjec.2010.125.2.549 · Cited by 720 · see citing works
Team size matters: Collaboration and scientific impact since 1900
Larivière, V., Gingras, Y., Sugimoto, C. R., & Tsou, A. (2015) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23266 · Cited by 484 · see citing works
Cheruvelil, K. S., Soranno, P. A., Weathers, K. C., Hanson, P. C., Goring, S. J., Filstrup, C. T., & Read, E. K. (2014) · Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment · doi:10.1890/130001 · Cited by 302 · see citing works
World citation and collaboration networks: uncovering the role of geography in science
Pan, R. K., Kaski, K., & Fortunato, S. (2012) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep00902 · Cited by 304 · see citing works
Scientific Collaboration on the Internet
(2008) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/9780262151207.001.0001 · Cited by 286 · see citing works
Gender differences in how scientists present the importance of their research: observational study
Lerchenmueller, M. J., Sorenson, O., & Jena, A. B. (2019) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.l6573 · Cited by 211 · see citing works
Researchers’ Individual Publication Rate Has Not Increased in a Century
Fanelli, D., & Larivière, V. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0149504 · Cited by 205 · see citing works
Persistence and uncertainty in the academic career
Petersen, A. M., Riccaboni, M., Stanley, H. E., & Pammolli, F. (2012) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1121429109 · Cited by 188 · see citing works
Cummings, J. N., & Kiesler, S. (2008) · Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work · doi:10.1145/1460563.1460633 · Cited by 183 · see citing works
Measuring Collaboration and Transdisciplinary Integration in Team Science
Mâsse, L. C., Moser, R. P., Stokols, D., Taylor, B. K., Marcus, S. E., Morgan, G. D., Hall, K. L., Croyle, R. T., & Trochim, W. M. (2008) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2008.05.020 · Cited by 181 · see citing works
Beyond the organizational ‘container’: Conceptualizing 21st century sociotechnical work
Winter, S., Berente, N., Howison, J., & Butler, B. (2014) · Information and Organization · doi:10.1016/j.infoandorg.2014.10.003 · Cited by 178 · see citing works
Crowdsourcing hypothesis tests: Making transparent how design choices shape research results.
Landy, J. F., Jia, M. (., Ding, I. L., Viganola, D., Tierney, W., Dreber, A., Johannesson, M., Pfeiffer, T., Ebersole, C. R., Gronau, Q. F., et al. (2020) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000220 · Cited by 168 · see citing works
Governing knowledge in the scientific community: Exploring the role of retractions in biomedicine
Furman, J. L., Jensen, K., & Murray, F. (2012) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2011.11.001 · Cited by 151 · see citing works
Jin, Y., Sanger, N., Shams, I., Luo, C., Shahid, H., Li, G., Bhatt, M., Zielinski, L., Bantoto, B., Wang, M., et al. (2018) · Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare · doi:10.2147/jmdh.s155103 · Cited by 134 · see citing works
Liang, J., Shu, R., & Farh, C. I. C. (2019) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.2325 · Cited by 124 · see citing works
Public use and public funding of science
Yin, Y., Dong, Y., Wang, K., Wang, D., & Jones, B. F. (2022) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-022-01397-5 · Cited by 123 · see citing works
Self-citationRising complexity and falling explanatory power in ecology
Low-Décarie, E., Chivers, C., & Granados, M. (2014) · Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment · doi:10.1890/130230 · Cited by 111 · see citing works
Fresh teams are associated with original and multidisciplinary research
Zeng, A., Fan, Y., Di, Z., Wang, Y., & Havlin, S. (2021) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-021-01084-x · Cited by 106 · see citing works
Webster, G. D., Jonason, P. K., & Schember, T. O. (2009) · Evolutionary Psychology · doi:10.1177/147470490900700301 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
Working Together Apart: Collaboration over the Internet
Olson, J. S., & Olson, G. M. (2014) · Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics · doi:10.2200/s00542ed1v01y201310hci020 · Cited by 95 · see citing works
Azoulay, P., Furman, J. L., Krieger, & Murray, F. (2015) · Review of Economics and Statistics · doi:10.1162/rest_a_00469 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
A Century of Science: Globalization of Scientific Collaborations, Citations, and Innovations
Dong, Y., Ma, H., Shen, Z., & Wang, K. (2017) · Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining · doi:10.1145/3097983.3098016 · Cited by 89 · see citing works
Scientific progress despite irreproducibility: A seeming paradox
Shiffrin, R. M., Börner, K., & Stigler, S. M. (2018) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1711786114 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Costly collaborations: The impact of scientific fraud on co‐authors' careers
Mongeon, P., & Larivière, V. (2016) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23421 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
The memory of science: Inflation, myopia, and the knowledge network
Pan, R. K., Petersen, A. M., Pammolli, F., & Fortunato, S. (2018) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2018.06.005 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Nabout, J. C., Parreira, M. R., Teresa, F. B., Carneiro, F. M., da Cunha, H. F., de Souza Ondei, L., Caramori, S. S., & Soares, T. N. (2015) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1385-5 · Cited by 80 · see citing works
Guilt by association: How scientific misconduct harms prior collaborators
Hussinger, K., & Pellens, M. (2019) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2018.01.012 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Knight, A. P., & Baer, M. (2014) · Social Psychological and Personality Science · doi:10.1177/1948550614538463 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Team size and retracted citations reveal the patterns of retractions from 1981 to 2020
Sharma, K. (2021) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-021-04125-4 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
The Reverse Matthew Effect: Consequences of Retraction in Scientific Teams
Jin, G. Z., Jones, B., Lu, S. F., & Uzzi, B. (2019) · The Review of Economics and Statistics · doi:10.1162/rest_a_00780 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Self-citationDeconstructing doctoral dissertations: how many papers does it take to make a PhD?
Hagen, N. T. (2010) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0214-8 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Hill, R., Yin, Y., Stein, C., Wang, X., Wang, D., & Jones, B. F. (2025) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-025-09048-1 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Self-citationThe Crowdless Future? Generative AI and Creative Problem Solving
Boussioux, L., N. Lane, J., Zhang, M., Jacimovic, V., & Lakhani, K. R. (2023) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4533642 · Cited by 343 · see citing works
When does brokerage matter? Citation impact of research teams in an emerging academic field
Collet, F., Robertson, D. A., & Lup, D. (2014) · Strategic Organization · doi:10.1177/1476127014530124 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Das, M., Piper, A. M., & Gergle, D. (2022) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/3480169 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Prediction of robust scientific facts from literature
Belikov, A. V., Rzhetsky, A., & Evans, J. (2022) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-022-00474-8 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Trends and predictors of biomedical research quality, 1990-2015: a meta-research study
Catillon, M. (2019) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030342 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
AlShebli, B., Makovi, K., & Rahwan, T. (2020) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-020-20617-y · Cited by 23 · see citing works
RetractedPrevalence of female authors in case reports published in the medical literature
Hsiehchen, D., Hsieh, A., & Espinoza, M. (2019) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.5000 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
A Quantitative Exploration on Reasons for Citing Articles from the Perspective of Cited Authors
Wang, B., Bu, Y., & Xu, Y. (2018) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-018-2787-6 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Bullock, G. S., Ward, P., Impellizzeri, F. M., Kluzek, S., Hughes, T., Hillman, C., Waterman, B. R., Danelson, K., Henry, K., Barr, E., et al. (2023) · Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy · doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.12016 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
LLM hallucinations in the wild: Large-scale evidence from non-existent citations
Zhao, Z., Wang, Y., Stuart, T., De Vaan, M., Ginsparg, P., & Yin, Y. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2605.07723 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
- Authors
- Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B.
- Affiliations
- Northwestern University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Wuchty, Stefan
- Jones, Benjamin F.
- Uzzi, Brian
- Venue
- Science
- Published
- 2007-05-18
- Volume
- 316
- Issue
- 5827
- Pages
- 1036-1039
- ISSN
- 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
- 1095-9203
- OpenAlex
- W1965631677
- Cited by
- 3,615
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 246 · 2025: 233 · 2024: 230 · 2023: 269 · 2022: 253 · 2021: 263 · 2020: 265 · 2019: 266 · 2018: 222 · 2017: 222 · 2016: 175 · 2015: 187 · 2014: 179 · 2013: 162 · 2012: 130
- FWCI
- 77.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Interdisciplinary Research and Collaboration
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
- Keywords
- research groups, knowledge production, research collaboration, citation impact, patent citations, high-impact research
- MeSH terms
- Authorship, Engineering, Humanities, Patents as Topic, Publishing, Research, Sociology, United States, Bibliometrics, Knowledge, Databases as Topic, Biomedical Research
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