Cited by 3,615scientometrics and bibliometrics researchInterdisciplinary Research and CollaborationPsychology Research and Bibliometrics

The Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge

Wuchty, Stefan, Jones, Benjamin F., Uzzi, Brian·2007·Science

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

Crossref · 10.1126/science.1136099

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

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