Commonalities and differences between scholarly and technical collaboration

被引:2
作者
Martin Meyer
Sujit Bhattacharya
机构
[1] SPRU,
[2] University of Sussex,undefined
[3] Freemann Centre Brighton,undefined
[4] NISTADS National Institute of Science,undefined
[5] Technology and Development Studies,undefined
来源
Scientometrics | 2004年 / 61卷
关键词
Patent Citation; Patent Data; Patent Document; Patent Analysis; Prolific Author;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Co-authorship analysis is a well-established tool in bibliometric analysis. It can be used at various levels to trace collaborative links between individuals, organisations, or countries. Increasingly, informetric methods are applied to patent data. It has been shown for another method that bibliometric tools cannot be applied without difficulty. This is due to the different process in which a patent is filed, examined, and granted and a scientific paper is submitted, refereed and published. However, in spite of the differences, there are also parallels between scholarly papers and patents. For instance, both papers and patents are the result of an intellectual effort, both disclose relevant information, and both are subject to a process of examination. Given the similarities, we shall raise the question as to which extent one can transfer co-authorship analysis to patent data.
引用
收藏
页码:443 / 456
页数:13
相关论文
共 36 条
  • [1] Bhattacharya S.(2001)Monitoring technology trends through patent analysis: A case study of thin film Research Evaluation 10 33-45
  • [2] Khan M. T. R.(2003)Characterizing intellectual spaces between science and technology Scientometrics 58 369-390
  • [3] Bhattacharya S.(2003)Large firms and the science-technology interface-Patents, patent citations, and scientific output of multinational corporations in thin films Scientometrics 58 265-279
  • [4] Kretschmer H.(2004)Transatlantic innovation infrastructure networks: public-private, EU-US R & D partnerships R & D Management 34 17-31
  • [5] Meyer M.(2003)Regional R & D activities and interactions in the Swedish Triple Helix Scientometrics 58 205-218
  • [6] Bhattacharya S.(2000)The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm Research Policy 29 313-330
  • [7] Meyer M.(2001)National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations Scientometrics 51 69-115
  • [8] Carayannis E. G.(2001)Double effort = Double impact? A critical view at international co-authorship in chemistry Scientometrics 50 199-214
  • [9] Laget P.(1997)What is research collaboration? Research Policy 26 1-18
  • [10] Danell R.(1997)Patterns of behaviour in coauthorship networks of invisible colleges Scientometrics 40 579-591