The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Collaboration Paradox: Scientific Productivity, the Internet, and Problems of Research in Developing Areas
Abstract
We examine the ways in which the research process differs in developed and developing areas by focusing on two questions. First, is collaboration associated with productivity? Second, is access to the Internet (specifically use of email) associated with reduced problems of collaboration? Recent analyses by Lee & Bozeman (2005) and Walsh & Maloney (2003) suggest affirmative answers to these questions for US scientists. Based on a comparative analysis of scientists in Ghana, Kenya, and the State of Kerala in south-western India ( N 918), we find that: (1) collaboration is not associated with any general increment in productivity; and (2) while access to email does attenuate research problems, such difficulties are structured more by national and regional context than by the collaborative process itself. The interpretation of these results suggests a paradox that raises issues for future studies: those conditions that unsettle the relationship between collaboration and productivity in developing areas may undermine the collaborative benefits of new information and communication technologies.
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.
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 We Know about Proximity and Distance in Work Groups? A Legacy of Research
Kiesler, S., & Cummings, J. N. (2002) · Distributed Work · doi:10.7551/mitpress/2464.003.0007 · Cited by 340
Cited by
The Impact of Research Collaboration on Scientific Productivity
Lee, S., & Bozeman, B. (2005) · Social Studies of Science · doi:10.1177/0306312705052359 · Cited by 1,642
Google Earth Engine Applications Since Inception: Usage, Trends, and Potential
Kumar, L., & Mutanga, O. (2018) · Remote Sensing · doi:10.3390/rs10101509 · Cited by 785
International research collaboration: An emerging domain of innovation studies?
Chen, K., Zhang, Y., & Fu, X. (2019) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2018.08.005 · Cited by 293
The relationship between research performance and international collaboration in chemistry
Kato, M., & Ando, A. (2013) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-013-1011-y · Cited by 75
Metadata
- Authors
- Duque, R. B., Ynalvez, M., Sooryamoorthy, R., Mbatia, P., Dzorgbo, D.-B. S., & Shrum, W.
- Venue
- Social Studies of Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-10
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 755-785
- ISSN
- 0036-8539 (ISSN-L)
- 0306-3127
- 1460-3659
- OpenAlex
- W2142098429
- Cited by
- 175
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 5.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Collaboration Paradox: Scientific Productivity, the Internet, and Problems of Research in Developing Areas. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0306312705053048
- The paper
- Duque, R. B., Ynalvez, M., Sooryamoorthy, R., Mbatia, P., Dzorgbo, D.-B. S., & Shrum, W. (2005). Collaboration Paradox: Scientific Productivity, the Internet, and Problems of Research in Developing Areas. Social Studies of Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312705053048
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.