Geographical-institutional diversity and heterophily in academic research: a social network analysis of international collaboration, research communities and co-authorship in the public relations discipline

References

• Abbasi, A., Altmann, J., & Hossain, L. (2011). Identifying the effects of co-authorship networks on the performance of scholars: A correlation and regression analysis of performance measures and social network analysis measures. Journal of Informetrics, 5(4), 594–607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2011.05.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abbasi, A., & Jaafari, A. (2013). Research impact and scholars’ geographical diversity. Journal of Informetrics, 7(3), 683–692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.04.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Albert, R., & Barabási, A. L. (2002). Statistical mechanics of complex networks. Reviews of Modern Physics, 74(1), 47–94.‏. https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.74.47
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angus, S. D., Atalay, K., Newton, J., & Ubilava, D. (2021). Geographic diversity in economic publishing. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 190, 255–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2021.08.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atouba, Y., & Shumate, M. (2010). Interorganizational networking patterns among development organizations. Journal of Communication, 60(2), 293–317. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01483.x. 2010.01483.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Austin, L. L. (2010). Framing diversity: A qualitative content analysis of public relations industry publications. Public Relations Review, 36(3), 298–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2010.04.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avidar, R. (2011). Israeli public relations and the Internet. Israel Affairs, 17(3), 401–421. https://doi.org/10.1080/13537121.2011.584668
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avidar, R., & Roth-Cohen, O. (2023). Social media theory in public relations: A curation of a neglected topic in public relations research. Public Relations Review, 49(5), 102386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2023.102386
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bales, M. E., Johnson, S. B., Keeling, J. W., Carley, K. M., Kunkel, F., & Merrill, J. A. (2011). Evolution of co-authorship in public health services and systems research. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 41(1), 112–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2011.03.018
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barabâsi, A. L., Jeong, H., Néda, Z., Ravasz, E., Schubert, A., & Vicsek, T. (2002). Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 311(3–4), 590–614.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barranco, O., Lozares, C., & Muntanyola-Saura, D. (2019). Heterophily in social groups formation: A social network analysis. Quality & Quantity, 53(2), 599–619. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-018-0777-7
   Google Scholar
• Bentley, P. (2012). Gender differences and factors affecting publication productivity among Australian university academics. Journal of Sociology, 48(1), 85–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783311411958
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blondel, V. D., Guillaume, J. L., Lambiotte, R., & Lefebvre, E. (2008, 10). Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory & Experiment, 2008 (2008(10), 10008.‏. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2008/10/P10008
   Google Scholar
• Bordons, M., Aparicio, J., González-Albo, B., & Díaz-Faes, A. (2015). The relationship between the research performance of scientists and their position in co-authorship networks in three fields. Journal of Informetrics, 9(1), 135–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2014.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borgatti, S. P., Mehra, A., Brass, D. J., & Labianca, G. (2009). Network analysis in the social sciences. Science, 323(5916), 892–895. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1165821
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, A. J. G., & Zimmermann, K. F. (2017). Three decades of publishing research in population economics. Journal of Population Economics, 30(1), 11–27.‏. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-016-0620-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burt, R. S., Kilduff, M., & Tasselli, S. (2013). Social network analysis: Foundations and frontiers on advantage. Annual Review of Psychology, 64(1), 527–547.‏. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143828
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cho, C. H., & Khang, H. (2006). The state of internet-related research in communications, marketing, and advertising: 1994-2003. Journal of Advertising, 35(3), 143–163. https://doi.org/10.2753/JOA0091-3367350309
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creedon, P., & Al-Khaja, M. (2019). An overview of middle east public relations practice, education, and research from isolation to globalization. Journal of Public Relations Research, 31(3–4), 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2019.1682324
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeSanctis, G. (2003). The social life of information systems research: A response to benbasat and zmud’s call for returning to the I.T. artifact. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 4(1), 16. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00043
   Google Scholar
• De Stefano, D., Giordano, G., & Vitale, M. P. (2011). Issues in the analysis of co-authorship networks. Quality & Quantity, 45(5), 1091–1107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-011-9493-2
   Google Scholar
• Dhanesh, G. S. (2015). The paradox of communicating CSR in India: Minimalist and strategic approaches. Journal of Public Relations Research, 27(5), 431–451. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2015.1084583
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ding, Y. (2011). Scientific collaboration and endorsement: Network analysis of co-authorship and citation networks. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 187–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dozier, D. M., & Lauzen, M. M. (2000). Freeing the intellectual domain from practice: public relations, activism and the role of the scholar. Journal of Public Relations Research, 12(1), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532754XJPRR1201_2
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, L. (2019). Power, diversity, and public relations. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, L., & Aulakh, S. (2023). Public relations recruitment as boundary-making: The client, the ‘fit’ and the disposability of diversity. Public Relations Inquiry, 13(1), 93–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/2046147X231210277
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisend, M., & Schmidt, S. (2014). The influence of knowledge-based resources and business scholars’ internationalization strategies on research performance. Research Policy, 43(1), 48–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.07.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisened, M. (2017). International diversity of authorship in advertising research. International Journal of Advertising, 36(1), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2016.1231970
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elgueta-Ruiz, Á., & Martínez-Ortiz, J. (2022). Public relations in the new millennium: Towards a synoptic view of fifteen years of research in public relations review in the 21st century (2000–2014). Public Relations Review, 48(2), 102175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2022.102175
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ertug, G., Brennecke, J., Kovács, B., & Zou, T. (2022). What does homophily do? A review of the consequences of homophily. Academy of Management Annals, 16(1), 38–69. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2020.0230
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Estévez-Mujica, C. P., Acero, A., Jiménez-Leal, W., & Garcia-Diaz, C. (2018). The influence of homophilous interactions on diversity effects in group problem-solving. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences, 22(1), 77–102.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fagan, J., Eddens, K. S., Dolly, J., Vanderford, N. L., Weiss, H., & Levens, J. S. (2018). Assessing research collaboration through co-authorship network analysis. The Journal of Research Administration, 49(1), 76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2014.07.015
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fitch, K., Clark, T., Kaur, K., Simorangkir, D. N., & Souket, R. (2023). Opening spaces for researching feminism and public relations: Perspectives from Australia, Indonesia and Malaysia. Public Relations Inquiry, 12(1), 93–111.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freeman, R. B., & Huang, W. (2015). Collaborating with people like me: Ethnic co-authorship within the United States. Journal of Labor Economics, 33(S1), S289–S318.‏. https://doi.org/10.1086/678973
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gillieatt, S., Fernandes, C., Fielding, A., Hendrick, A., Martin, R., & Matthews, S. (2015). Social network analysis and social work inquiry. Australian Social Work, 68(3), 338–351.‏. https://doi.org/10.1080/0312407X.2015.1035660
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goyal, S., Van Der Leij, M. J., & Moraga-González, J. L. (2006). Economics: An emerging small world. Journal of Political Economy, 114(2), 403–412.‏. https://doi.org/10.1086/500990
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380. https://doi.org/10.1086/225469
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gregory, A., & Halff, G. (2013). Divided we stand: Defying hegemony in global public relations theory and practice? Public Relations Review, 39(5), 417–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2013.04.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grunig, J. E. (2009). Paradigms of global public relations in an age of digitalization. PRism, 6(2), 1–19.
   Google Scholar
• Han, P., Shi, J., Li, X., Wang, D., Shen, S., & Su, X. (2014). International collaboration in LIS: Global trends and networks at the country institutional level. Scientometrics, 98(1), 53–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1146-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harkins, S. G., & Petty, R. E. (1982). Effects of task difficulty and task uniqueness on social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(6), 1214–1229. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.43.6.1214
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• He, Z.-L., Geng, X.-S., & Campbell-Hunt, C. (2009). Research collaboration and research output: A longitudinal study of 65 biomedical scientists in a New Zealand university. Research Policy, 38(2), 306–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.11.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Himelboim, I., Golan, G. J., Moon, B. B., & Suto, R. J. (2014). A social networks approach to public relations on twitter: Social mediators and mediated public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 26(4), 359–379. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2014.908724
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horta, H., Feng, S., & Santos, J. M. (2022). Homophily in higher education research: A perspective based on co-authorships. Scientometrics, 127(1), 523–543. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04227-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu, C., & Racherla, P. (2008). Visual representation of knowledge networks: A social network analysis of hospitality research domain. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 27(2), 302–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2007.01.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunt, V., Layton, D., & Prince, S. (2015). Diversity matters. McKinsey and Company, 1(1), 15–29.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, M., Chorazy, E., Sison, M. D., & Wise, D. (2022). Public relations ethics in the 21st century: A state-of-the-field review. Journal of Communication Management, 26(3), 294–314. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCOM-12-2020-0164
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jain, R., De Moya, M., & Molleda, J. C. (2014). State of international public relations research: Narrowing the knowledge gap about the practice across borders. Public Relations Review, 40(3), 595–597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.02.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(2), 256–282. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393638
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ju, R., Braun, S., Huynhn, D., & McCaffrey, S. (2021). Status of social media public relations research: An analysis of recent developments and trends. Prism 17(1). 13 April, 2024. https://www.prismjournal.org/uploads/1/2/5/6/125661607/article_in_template_v2.pdf (
   Google Scholar
• Kretschmer, H. (1994). Co-authorship networks of invisible colleges and institutionalized communities. Scientometrics, 30(1), 363–369. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02017234
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar, R., Novak, J., & Tomkins, A. (2010). Structure and evolution of online social networks. In F. Yu, J. Han, & C. Faloutsos (Eds.), Link mining: Models, algorithms, and applications (pp. 337–357). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Kumar, S. (2015). Co-authorship networks: A review of the literature. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 67(1), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-09-2014-0116
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, J. M., Resnick, L. B., & Higgins, E. T. (1993). Social foundations of cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 44(1), 585–612. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.44.020193.003101
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liefner, I., & Hennemann, S. (2011). Structural holes and new dimensions of distance: The spatial configuration of the scientific knowledge network of China’s optical technology sector. Environment and Planning A, 43(4), 810–829. https://doi.org/10.1068/a43100
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, P., Luo, S., & Xia, H. (2015). Evolution of scientific collaboration network driven by homophily and heterophily. Physics and society. http://arxiv.org/abs/1510.07763
   Google Scholar
• Liu, Y., Zhang, M., Zhang, G., & You, X. (2022). Scientific elites versus other scientists: who are better at taking advantage of the research collaboration network? Scientometrics, 127(6), 3145–3166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04362-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loblich, M., & Scheu, A. M. (2011). Writing the history of communication studies: A sociology of science approach. Communication Theory, 21(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2010.01373.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lungeanu, A., & Contractor, N. S. (2015). The effects of diversity and network ties on innovations: The emergence of a new scientific field. American Behavioral Scientist, 59(5), 548–564. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764214556804
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macnamara, J., Zerfass, A., Adi, A., & Lwin, M. O. (2018). Capabilities of PR professionals for key activities lag: Asia-pacific study shows theory and practice gaps. Public Relations Review, 44(5), 704–716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.10.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCorkindale, T., & DiStaso, M. W. (2014). The state of social media research: Where are we now, where we were and what it means for public relations. Research Journal of the Institute for Public Relations, 1(1), 1–17.
   Google Scholar
• Merrill, J., & Hripcsak, G. (2008). Using social network analysis within a department of biomedical informatics to induce a discussion of academic communities of practice. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 15(6), 780–782. https://doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M2717
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moody, J. (2004). The structure of a social science collaboration network: Disciplinary cohesion from 1963 to 1999. American Sociological Review, 69(2), 213–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240406900204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morehouse, J., & Saffer, A. J. (2018). A bibliometric analysis of dialogue and digital dialogic research: Mapping the knowledge construction and invisible colleges in public relations research. Journal of Public Relations Research, 30(3), 65–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2018.1498343
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morehouse, J., & Saffer, J. A. (2019). Illuminating the invisible college: An analysis of foundational and prominent publications of engagement research in public relations. Public Relations Review, 45(5), 101836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.101836
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morehouse, J., & Saffer, J. A. (2020). The knowledge construction network of engagement research: Examining scholars’ star collaborators, embeddedness, and influence. Public Relations Review, 46(3), 101924. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2020.101924
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naik, C., Sugimoto, C. S., Larivière, V., Leng, C., & Guo, W. (2023). Impact of geographic diversity on citation of collaborative research. Quantitative Science Studies, 4(2), 442–465. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00248
   Google Scholar
• Neville, B. (2008). Creating a research community. Qualitative Research Journal, 8(1), 37–46. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0801037
   Google Scholar
• Newman, M. E. J. (2004). Who is the best connected scientist? A study of scientific co-authorship networks. In E. Ben-Naim, H. Frauenfelder, & Z. Toroczkai (Eds.), Complex networks. Lecture notes in physics (pp. 650. (pp. 337–370). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Newman, M. E. J., & Park, J. (2003). Why social networks are different from other types of networks. Physical Review E, 68(3), 036122.‏. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.68.036122
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Onifade, F. N., & Bridges, L. (2018). Sister library cooperation: Inspiring cross-cultural capability for librarians. IFLA Journal, 44(1), 44–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/0340035217751959
   Google Scholar
• Otte, E., & Rousseau, R. (2002). Social network analysis: A powerful strategy, also for the information sciences. Journal of Information Science, 28(6), 441–453. https://doi.org/10.1177/016555150202800601
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Page, S. E. (2008). The difference: How the power of diversity creates better groups, firms, schools, and societies. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Page, T. G., & Capizzo, L. W. (2021). From “an open field” to established “waves”: Public relations scholarship through the lens of public relations review. Public Relations Review, 47(5), 102115. Article 102115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2021.102115
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pasadeos, Y., Renfro, R. B., & Hanily, M. L. (1999). Influential authors and works of the public relations scholarly literature: A network of recent research. Journal of Public Relations Research, 11(1), 29–52. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532754xjprr1101_02
   Google Scholar
• Phillips, K. W. (2014). How diversity works. Scientific American Mind, 25(4), 42–49. Retrieved January 11, 2024, from. https://www.scientificamerican.com/index.cfm/_api/render/file/?method=inline&fileID=9F4FCDB9-A5B3-40AB-A9A525FDC71156AB
   Google Scholar
• Przemyslaw, H. (2019). Institutionalized publishing practices as a barrier to participation in the global management discourse. International Journal of Contemporary Management, 14(4), 155–178. https://doi.org/10.4467/24498939IJCM.18.041.10027
   Google Scholar
• Przemyslaw, H. (2023). Geographical diversity of management and organization research. OSF Preprints. Center for Open Science. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/3zmjf
   Google Scholar
• Ramazi, P., Riehl, J., & Cao, M. (2018). Homophily, heterophily and the diversity of messages among decision-making individuals. The Royal Society Open Science, 5(4), 180027. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.180027
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ribeiro, L. C., Rapini, M. S., Silva, L. A., & Albuquerque, E. M. (2018). Growth patterns of the network of international collaboration in science. Scientometrics, 114(1), 159–179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2573-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodriguez, M. A., & Pepe, A. (2008). On the relationship between the structural and socioacademic communities of a co-authorship network. Journal of Informetrics, 2(3), 195–201.‏. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2008.04.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roth-Cohen, O., & Avidar, R. (2022). A decade of social media in public relations research: A systematic review of published articles in 2010–2020. Public Relations Review, 48(1), 102154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2022.102154
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salamati, P., & Soheili, F. (2016). Social network analysis of Iranian researchers in the field of violence. Chinese Journal of Traumatology, 19(5), 264–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjtee.2016.06.008
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Santos, J. M., Horta, H., & Feng, S. (2024). Homophily and its effects on collaborations and repeated collaborations: A study across scientific fields. Scientometrics, 129(3), 1801–1823. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-04950-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shi, J., Deng, G., Ma, S., Zeng, X., Yin, X., Li, M., & Chen, H. (2018). Rapid evolution of H7N9 highly pathogenic viruses that emerged in China in 2017. Cell Host & Microbe, 24(4), 558–568.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sommerfeldt, E. J., Pilny, A., & Saffer, A. J. (2022). Interorganizational homophily and social capital network positions in Malaysian civil society. Communication Monographs, 90(1), 46–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2022.2067346
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sweetser, K. (2010). A losing strategy: The impact of nondisclosure in social media on relationships. Journal of Public Relations Research, 22(3), 288–312. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627261003614401
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toledano, M., & Riches, M. (2014). Brand alliance and event management for social causes: Evidence from New Zealand. Public Relations Review, 40(5), 807–814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.09.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Traag, V. A., Waltman, L., & Van Eck, N. J. (2019). From Louvain to Leiden: Guaranteeing well-connected communities. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 5233.‏. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-41695-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Triandis, H. C., Hall, E. R., & Ewen, R. B. (1965). Member heterogeneity and dyadic creativity. Human Relations, 18(1), 33–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872676501800104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valentini, C. (2015). Is using social media “good” for the public relations profession? A critical reflection. Public Relations Review, 41(2), 170–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.11.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valentini, C. (2020). Trust research in public relations: an assessment of its conceptual, theoretical and methodological foundations. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 26(1), 84–106. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCIJ-01-2020-0030
   Google Scholar
• Valentini, C. (2021). Public relations and social influence: Understanding the roots of a contested profession. In C. Valentini (Ed.), Public Relations (pp. 3–20). Mouton De Gruyter Mouton.
   Google Scholar
• Valentini, C., & Luoma-Aho, V. (2023). The European school of public relations: Origins, main traits, and theoretical contributions. In C. H. Botan & E. J. Sommerfeldt (Eds.), Public relations theory III: In the age of publics (pp. 338–356). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Vardeman-Winter, J., & Place, K. R. (2017). Still a lily-white field of women: The state of workforce diversity in public relations practice and research. Public Relations Review, 43(2), 326–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2017.01.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Volk, S. C. (2022). Comparative communication research: A study of the conceptual, methodological, and social challenges of international collaborative studies in communication science. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Witt, S. W. (2018). Co-authorship and diversity among researchers: Positive trends for IFLA and the global profession. IFLA Journal, 44(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1177/0340035218758160
   Google Scholar
• Yousefi-Nooraie, R., Akbari-Kamrani, M., Hanneman, R. A., & Etemadi, A. (2008). Association between co-authorship network and scientific productivity and impact indicators in academic medical research centers: A case study in Iran. Health Research Policy and Systems, 6(1), 1–8.‏‏. https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-4505-6-9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zeleny, L. D. (1955). Validity of a sociometric hypothesis-the function of creativity in interpersonal and group relations. Sociometry, 18(4), 183–193.
   Google Scholar
• Zerfass, A., & Link, J. (2023). Business models for communication departments: A comprehensive approach to analyzing, explaining and innovating communication management in organizations. Journal of Communication Management.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, C., Bu, Y., Ding, Y., & Xu, J. (2018). Understanding scientific collaboration: Homophily, transitivity, and preferential attachment. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 69(1), 72–86. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23916
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zurn, P., Bassett, D. S., & Rust, N. C. (2020). The citation diversity statement: A practice of transparency, a way of life. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 24(9), 669–672. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2020.06.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar