I noticed that discussions on the Research Gate portal often include considerations in the subject below. Multinationality is dominant in many countries, the majority of scientific articles, especially those that were created as a result of research projects, have a team of authors rather than one author.
However, in some countries, more texts are created with one author, which is related to the specificity of research, the culture of organization and research and development or scientific and didactic activity. In addition, it may also be conditioned by the national specificity of the dominant standards in the field of conducted scientific-research or scientific-didactic activity.
It seems to me that whether or not there are more scientific publications written by one author or multi-author in a given community of scientists, in a given country, it depends on many factors, not only from the authors themselves. Above all, key determinants can be distinguished: specific local conventions shaped by a given community of scientists, informal standards, cultural interpersonal realities and differences in valuation, in the system of values referring to recognition as a more or less scientific approach in comparison of team or individual research scientists' projects.
To this should be added the issues of self-realization of scientists, among whom there are people who prefer teamwork or rather individual approach to specific research, their implementation, inference and writing of scientific publications. In connection with the above, one can distinguish many objective environmental determinants and the preferences of a particular scientist who usually writes articles either individually or more often as a team.
Therefore, in my opinion, therefore, one can not objectively answer the question, which scientific articles, with one author or with many authors, can or are usually more scientifically valuable? Both numerous authors are determined by many factors as well as whether the scientific article will present valuable scientific results is also determined by many factors.
These two quarters, i.e. the number of authors in scientific articles and the scientific value of these articles, in my opinion, are not closely related to each other. on the other hand, multi-authoring has its positive aspects, in terms of conducting research in a team model, exchanging scientific experiences, citing articles, and formulating constructive conclusions.
However, this does not necessarily prejudge that multi-author texts can more often present more valuable scientific results. In my opinion, there is no such rule. Texts with one author have their positive qualities as well as texts with many authors also have their positive aspects, they do not always have to be the same aspects.
According to the above, in my opinion, on a global scale it is difficult to objectively answer this question, because in some countries it is the dominant canon of the formula of one-author publications, while in many countries a large part of the research publications are published by research teams as a result of collaborative research.
Any form of writing scientific publications, ie one-stop and multi-authoring, has its positive aspects. Multi-author scholarly publications are usually the culmination of collaborative projects and scientific research.
Single-author scientific publications usually present unique approaches to specific research theories and concepts or the results of individual scientific research. Sometimes they contain the features of a subjective view of a given research problem and therefore also have positive aspects.
In view of the above, both single-author and multi-author publications have their positive aspects. However, the set of specific positive aspects may vary depending on the type of scientific publication, dominant canons in a specific scientific institution, in specific learning environments in individual countries. Due to the ongoing information globalization, also taking place in the world of science, the above-mentioned differences should gradually change significantly over time.
It is very good that there are such Internet portals that propagate scientific knowledge in the form of various publications like the Research Gate portal. In this way, globalization of the information world of science also undergoes progressive globalization, certain regional and national standards become globalized, standardized, and standardized, and scientists and researchers of specific issues have the possibility to set up and develop international research teams. The confirmation of this thesis is the fact that most Research and Multi-Author publications are published on Research Gate.
Do you agree with my opinion on this matter?
In view of the above, I am asking you the following question:
Does the Research Gate portal contain more one-stop or multi-author publications?
Please reply
I invite you to the discussion
Thank you very much
Best wishes
Dear Friends and Colleagues of RG
I noticed that discussions on the Research Gate portal often include considerations in the subject below. Multinationality is dominant in many countries, the majority of scientific articles, especially those that were created as a result of research projects, have a team of authors rather than one author. However, in some countries, more texts are created with one author, which is related to the specificity of research, the culture of organization and research and development or scientific and didactic activity. In addition, it may also be conditioned by the national specificity of the dominant standards in the field of conducted scientific-research or scientific-didactic activity. It seems to me that whether or not there are more scientific publications written by one author or multi-author in a given community of scientists, in a given country, it depends on many factors, not only from the authors themselves. Above all, key determinants can be distinguished: specific local conventions shaped by a given community of scientists, informal standards, cultural interpersonal realities and differences in valuation, in the system of values referring to recognition as a more or less scientific approach in comparison of team or individual research scientists' projects. To this should be added the issues of self-realization of scientists, among whom there are people who prefer teamwork or rather individual approach to specific research, their implementation, inference and writing of scientific publications. In connection with the above, one can distinguish many objective environmental determinants and the preferences of a particular scientist who usually writes articles either individually or more often as a team. Therefore, in my opinion, therefore, one can not objectively answer the question, which scientific articles, with one author or with many authors, can or are usually more scientifically valuable? Both numerous authors are determined by many factors as well as whether the scientific article will present valuable scientific results is also determined by many factors. These two quarters, i.e. the number of authors in scientific articles and the scientific value of these articles, in my opinion, are not closely related to each other. on the other hand, multi-authoring has its positive aspects, in terms of conducting research in a team model, exchanging scientific experiences, citing articles, and formulating constructive conclusions. However, this does not necessarily prejudge that multi-author texts can more often present more valuable scientific results. In my opinion, there is no such rule. Texts with one author have their positive qualities as well as texts with many authors also have their positive aspects, they do not always have to be the same aspects. According to the above, in my opinion, on a global scale it is difficult to objectively answer this question, because in some countries it is the dominant canon of the formula of one-author publications, while in many countries a large part of the research publications are published by research teams as a result of collaborative research. Any form of writing scientific publications, ie one-stop and multi-authoring, has its positive aspects. Multi-author scholarly publications are usually the culmination of collaborative projects and scientific research. Single-author scientific publications usually present unique approaches to specific research theories and concepts or the results of individual scientific research. Sometimes they contain the features of a subjective view of a given research problem and therefore also have positive aspects. In view of the above, both single-author and multi-author publications have their positive aspects. However, the set of specific positive aspects may vary depending on the type of scientific publication, dominant canons in a specific scientific institution, in specific learning environments in individual countries. Due to the ongoing information globalization, also taking place in the world of science, the above-mentioned differences should gradually change significantly over time. It is very good that there are such Internet portals that propagate scientific knowledge in the form of various publications like the Research Gate portal. In this way, globalization of the information world of science also undergoes progressive globalization, certain regional and national standards become globalized, standardized, and standardized, and scientists and researchers of specific issues have the possibility to set up and develop international research teams. The confirmation of this thesis is the fact that most Research and Multi-Author publications are published on Research Gate. Do you agree with my opinion on this matter? In view of the above, I am asking you the following question: Does the Research Gate portal contain more one-stop or multi-author publications? Please reply I invite you to the discussion Thank you very much Best wishes
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publications