Coauthored scholarship increased substantially across fields of science during the twentieth century, but it is unclear whether this growth reflects change in the behavior of individual scientists (i.e., career aging) or publishing differences between cohorts of researchers (i.e., cohort succession). I examine the publication records of an interdisciplinary sample of university scientists and find evidence of both career-aging and cohort-succession processes, although cohort differences are much more pronounced than individual changes. Specifically, scientists in this sample increased the percentage of their articles with coauthors by 0.63 percentage points annually. However, compared to those who received their PhDs between 1953 and 1962, scientists who entered the workforce between 1983 and 1991 coauthored approximately one third more of their early career articles (35.63 percentage points). Additionally, career-aging processes in coauthorship varied by PhD cohort, with earlier trained researchers increasing more rapidly. Overall, this article highlights cohort succession as a source of change in coauthorship, and underscores the importance of accounting for generational differences in studies of scientific careers.
AdamsJamesBlackGrantRodger CommonsJ.StephanPaula. 2005. “Scientific Teams and Institutional Collaborations: Evidence from US Universities, 1981-1999.”Research Policy34:259–85.
2.
AllisonPaulScott LongJ.1990. “Departmental Effects on Scientific Productivity.”American Sociological Review55:469–78.
3.
ArtisJuliePavalkoEliza. 2003. “Explaining the Decline in Women’s Household Labor: Individual Change and Cohort Differences.”Journal of Marriage and Family65:746–61.
4.
BayerAlan, E.SmartJohn C.1991. “Career Publication Patterns and Collaborative ‘Styles’ in American Academic Science.”Journal of Higher Education62:613–36.
5.
BeaverDonald. 2004. “Does Research Collaboration Have Greater Epistemic Authority?”Scientometrics60:399–408.
6.
BeaverDonaldRosenR.1978. “Studies in Scientific Collaboration: Part I. The Professional Origins of Scientific Co-Authorship.”Scientometrics1:65–84.
7.
BeaverDonaldRosenR.1979. “Studies in Scientific Collaboration: Professionalization and the Natural History of Modern Scientific Co-Authorship.”Scientometrics1:231–45.
8.
BrewsterK. L.PadavicI.2000. “Change in Gender-Ideology, 1977-1996: The Contributions of Intracohort Change and Population Turnover.”Journal of Marriage and the Family62:477–87.
9.
BrykAnthonyRaudenbushStephan. 1992. Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
10.
CapshewJamesRaderKaren. 1992. “Big Science: Price to the Present.”Osiris, 2nd Series7:2–25.
11.
EndersbyJames. 1996. “Collaborative Research in the Social Sciences: Multiple Authorship and Publication Credit.”Social Science Quarterly77:375–92.
12.
FanJianqingGijbelsIrene. 1996. Local Polynomial Modeling and its Applications. London: Chapman and Hall/CRC.
13.
FernandezJ. A.1998. “The Transition from and Individual Science to a Collective One: The Case of Astronomy.”Scientometrics42:61–74.
14.
FirebaughGlenn. 1992. “Where Does Social Change Come From?”Population Research and Policy Review11:1–20.
15.
FirebaughGlennDavisK. K.1988. “Trends in Anti-Black Prejudice 1972-1984: Region and Cohort Effects.”American Journal of Sociology94:251–72.
16.
FoxMary FrankFaverCatherine. 1984. “Independence and Cooperation in Research: Motivations and Costs of Collaboration.”Journal of Higher Learning55:347–59.
17.
FrameJ. DavidsonCarpenterMark. 1979. “International Research Collaboration.”Social Studies of Science4:481–97.
18.
FuwaMakiko. 2004. “Macro-level Gender Inequality and the Divisions of Household Labor in 22 Countries.”The American Sociological Review69:751–67.
19.
GalisonPeterHevlyBruceLownRebecca. 1992. “Controlling the Monster: Stanford and the Growth of Physics Research, 1935-1960.” In Big Science: The Growth of Large Scale Research, edited by GalisonPeterHevlyBruce, 46–77. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
20.
HeckmanJamesRobbRichared. 1985. “Alternative Methods for Evaluating the Impact of Intervention: An Overview.”Journal of Econometrics30:239–67.
21.
HicksDianaKatzSylvan. 1996. “Where is Science Going?”Science, Technology, & Human Values21:379–406.
HwangKumju. 2008. “International Collaboration in Multilayered Center-Periphery in the Globalization of Science and Technology.”Science, Technology, & Human Values33:103–33.
24.
KaplowitzMichaelHadlockTimothyLevineRalph. 2004. “A Comparison of Web and Mail Survey Response Rates.”Public Opinion Quarterly68:94–101.
25.
LairdNanWareJames. 1982. “Random Effects Models for Longitudinal Data.”Biometrics38:963–74.
26.
LandryRéjeanTraoreNamatieGodinBenoit. 1996. “An Econometric Analysis of the Effects of Collaboration on Academic Research Productivity.”Higher Education32:283–301.
LeeSohooBozemanBarry. 2005. “The Impact of Research Collaboration on Scientific Productivity.”Social Studies of Science35:673–702.
29.
LeeWade. 2000. “The Publication Trends of Doctoral Students in Three Fields from 1965-1995.”Journal of the American Society for Information Science51:139–44.
30.
LeaheyErinReikowskyRyan. 2008. “Research Specialization and Collaboration Patterns in Sociology.”Social Studies of Science38:425–40.
31.
LongJ. Scott. 1990. “The Origins of Sex Differences in Science.”Social Forces68:1297–315.
32.
LongJ. Scott. 1992. “Measures of Sex Differences in Scientific Productivity.”Social Forces71:159–78.
LongJ. ScottMcGinnisRobertAllisonPaul. 1980. “The Problem of Junior-Authored Papers in Constructing Citation Counts.”Social Studies of Science10:127–43.
35.
LuukkonenTerttuPerssonOlleSiverstenBunnar. 1992. “Understanding Patterns of International Scientific Collaboration.”Science, Technology, & Human Values17:1010–126.
36.
MahlckPaula. 2001. “Mapping Gender Differences in Scientific Careers in Social and Bibliometric Space.”Science, Technology, & Human Values26:167–90.
37.
MannheimKarl. (1927) 1952. “The Problem of Generations.” In Essays on the Sociology of Knowledge, edited by KecskemetiPaul, 276–322. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
38.
MasonW. M.FienbergS. E.1985. Cohort Analysis in Social Research: Beyond the Identification Problem. New York, NY: Spring-Verlag.
39.
MertonRobert K.(1957) 1973. “Priorities in Scientific Discovery.” In Sociology of Science, edited by StorerNorman, 286–324. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
40.
National Science Board. 2006. Science and Engineering Indicators, 2006. Two volumes. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation(volume 1, NSB 06-01; volume 2, NSB 06-01A).
41.
NewmanMark. 2004. “Coauthorship Networks and Patters of Scientific Collaboration.”Proceedings of the National Academies of Science101:5201–5.
42.
PontilleDavid. 2003. “Authorship Practices and Institutional Contexts in Sociology: Elements for a Comparison of the United States and France.”Science, Technology, & Human Values28:217–43.
43.
PestreDominiqueKrigeJohn. 1992. “The History of CERN.” In Big Science: The Growth of Large Scale Research, edited by GalisonPeterHevlyBruce, 78–99. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
44.
PriceDerek de Solla. 1986. Little Science, Big Science, and Beyond. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
45.
RyderNorman. 1965. “The Cohort as a Concept in the Study of Social Change.”American Sociological Review30:843–61.
46.
SeidelRobert. 1992. “The Origins of the Lawrence-Berkeley Lab.” In Big Science: The Growth of Large Scale Research, edited by GalisonPeterHevlyBruce, 21–45. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
47.
ShrumWesleyGenuthJoelChompalovIvan. 2007. Structures of Scientific Collaboration. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
48.
StataCorp. 2009. Stata Statistical Software: Release 11. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP.
49.
WalshJohnMaloneyNancy. 2007. “Collaboration Structure, Communication Media and Problems in Scientific Team Work.”Journal of Computer Mediated Communications12:712–32.
50.
WhitleyRichard. 1984. The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
51.
WilliamsonOliver. 1981. “The Economics of Organization: The Transaction Cost Approach.”American Journal of Sociology87:548–77.
52.
WrayK. Brad. 2002. “The Epistemic Significance of Collaborative Research.”Philosophy of Science6:150–68.
53.
WuchtyStephanJonesBenjaminUzziBrian. 2007. “The Increasing Dominance of Team in Production of Knowledge.”Science316:1036–9.
54.
YammarinoFrancisSkinnerStevenChildersTerry. 1991. “Understanding Mail Survey Response Behavior: A Meta-Analysis.”Public Opinion Quarterly55:613–39.
55.
ZimanJohn. 1987. Knowing Everything About Nothing: Specialization and Change in Research Careers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
56.
ZuckermanHarriet. 1967. “Nobel Laureates in Science: Patterns of Productivity, Collaboration and Authorship.”American Sociological Review32:391–403.
57.
ZuckermanHarrietRobertK. Merton. (1972) 1973. “Age, Aging and Age Structure in Science.” In Sociology of Science, edited by StorerNorman, 497–559. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
