A consist of all proposals submitted in the final three years of a
Our results showed that researchers from top rated tier universities or with higher H-index collaborate significantly less, whilst researchers from reduce tier universities and with reduce H-indexNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA jir.2013.0113 Author ManuscriptJ Informetr. Author manuscript; accessible in PMC 2015 January 01.Lungeanu et al.Pagecollaborate additional (Hypotheses 3 and four). The outcomes are significant in both the awarded and un-awarded models. This suggests fpsyg.2016.00135 that researchers from Higher H-index are much less likely to collaborate with other researchers on non-elite universities or with reduced H-index scores may signal the high quality and novelty of their proposals by which includes additional collaborators. Alternatively, or in addition, our outcomes suggest that researchers from elite universities or with larger H-index scores have a higher potential to absorb and leverage intellectual and supplies resources thereby decreasing the need for additional collaborations. In comparison with tenure, H-index has an opposite but dominant impact with virtually five occasions larger effect sizes. Though H-index and tenure possess a constructive correlation (0.35) due to the fact Hindex incorporates paper productivity which increases more than years, the two measure various elements of academic status: tenure is usually a linear measure of time as a base line and H-index measures the quantity and excellent of your study outcome.A contain all proposals submitted within the final 3 years of a well publicized and fairly targeted NSF research initiative. This context encourages us to be confident that researchers who had an intention to contribute to the NSF initiative would have accomplished so through the last three years of your two initiatives. An option explanation for this obtaining could be that review panels are aware on the effectively documented gender disparity in scientific analysis and consequently might be unconsciously tipping their evaluations in favor of proposals that integrated females collaborators. We also discovered that researchers with greater tenure are additional probably to collaborate on investigation proposals (Hypothesis 2). Interestingly, the results are also substantial for un-awarded proposals. This suggests that even though a lot more senior researchers have more collaborators, it's not required that these collaborations will produce great interdisciplinary outcomes. The lack of success in this collaboration might be explained by the Apollo Syndrome (Belbin, 1981), which suggested that teams composed of highly capable folks can collectively perform badly. Our benefits also revealed that NSF seems to reward researchers with reduce tenure. This may reflect the fresh and revolutionary suggestions which junior researchers bring to the study arena. Our final results showed that researchers from best tier universities or with high H-index collaborate less, while researchers from reduced tier universities and with decrease H-indexNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA jir.2013.0113 Author ManuscriptJ Informetr. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 January 01.Lungeanu et al.Pagecollaborate far more (Hypotheses three and four).A include things like all proposals submitted in the final 3 years of a effectively publicized and fairly targeted NSF analysis initiative. This discovering is important for organizations including NSF that focus particularly on proposals having a larger chance of know-how production, a domain in which girls researchers have previously been shown to excel (Rhoten Pfirman, 2007). An alternative explanation for this discovering may be that assessment panels are aware on the effectively documented gender disparity in scientific study and as a result might be unconsciously tipping their evaluations in favor of proposals that included females collaborators.