Assessing Co-Authored Papers in Tenure Decisions: Implications for Research

Independence and Career Strategies in Economics

Lekang REN
The IPE Thrust, Society Hub, HKUST(GZ)
Danyang XIE
The IPE Thrust, Society Hub, HKUST(GZ)
January 2025

Abstract
In tenure decisions, the treatment of co-authored papers often raises questions about a candidate's
research independence. This study examines the effects of solo versus collaborative authorship in
high-profile Economics journals on long-term academic success. Our findings confirms the
traditional belief that solo-authored publications significantly enhance long-term research output
and citation impact compared to collaborative efforts. However, relative to solo-authored papers,
international collaborations have a less negative impact on long-term success than national and
institutional collaborations. Temporal trends highlight the increasing importance of diverse and
international collaborations. These insights provide actionable guidance for tenure committees on
evaluating co-authored work and for researchers on optimizing their publication strategies.

1
Introduction
The competitive nature of academia places early-career researchers under immense pressure to
publish in prestigious journals to secure tenure and long-term academic success (Hou et al 2022).
Lee (2019) analyzed the total citations received during the second four-year phase of researchers'
careers to determine how early career impact influences later success. A critical aspect of tenure
decisions is the evaluation of co-authored papers, which raises important questions about a
candidate’s research independence. This study investigates the long-term academic outcomes of
solo versus collaborative authorship among economists and provides insights into how tenure
committees should assess co-authored work. Additionally, it offers strategic guidance for
researchers on optimizing their publication strategies based on these assessment criteria.

Our analysis confirms the traditional belief that solo-authored papers significantly enhance long-
term productivity and citation impact compared to collaborative efforts. Economists who
published solo early in their careers demonstrated higher average citation counts and paper
counts over time, highlighting the importance of independent research contributions (Horta and
Santos, 2010). However, our findings also show that not all collaborations are equal. Relative to
solo-authored papers, international collaborations have a less negative impact on long-term
success than national and institutional collaborations. This suggests that while solo-authored
publications remain crucial, international collaborations should be valued more favorably in
tenure assessments compared to other forms of collaboration. In our discussions, we do not
explore whether solo or co-authored papers are of higher quality. This question is intriguing in its
own right. According to Bridgstock (1991), the answer remains unresolved and may vary by
field, though his findings suggest that solo-authored papers often come out on top. In principle,
we can examine whether a finer classification of collaborative work into international, national,
and institutional collaborations sheds new light on this question.

Temporal trends further underscore the increasing importance of diverse and international
collaborations. Post-2000, the penalties for institutional collaborations have become more
pronounced, reflecting the evolving landscape of academic research where interdisciplinary and
cross-border collaborations are increasingly valued.

For tenure committees, these insights suggest that greater weight should be assigned to solo-
authored papers to recognize research independence while also appreciating the value of
international collaborations. For researchers, prioritizing solo-authored publications and
engaging in strategic international collaborations can optimize long-term academic success and

2
meet tenure expectations. These findings provide actionable guidance for both tenure committees
and researchers in navigating the complexities of academic publishing and career advancement.

Methods
Using a comprehensive dataset, we analyzed the publication records of 6,360 economists who
published in 68 leading economics journals between 1980 and 2014. Our primary objective was
to assess the impact of early solo and collaborative publications on long-term academic
productivity and citation impact. To achieve this, we ran regression models that allowed us to
examine the relationship between authorship type and long-term outcomes while controlling for
various confounding factors.

Each economist's publication history was meticulously recorded, noting whether their early
works were solo-authored or collaborative. We categorized collaborations into three types:
institutional (co-authors from the same institution), national (co-authors from different
institutions within the same country), and international (co-authors from different countries).
This categorization enabled us to investigate the differential impacts of various types of
collaborations.

To ensure the robustness of our findings, we controlled for several key variables. Demographic
controls include Gender, represented as a dummy variable. Educational background is reflected
through the Institution Score, which is derived from the annual QS Score of the author's
affiliated institution. This score, ranging from 20 to 100 (with scores below 20 recorded as 0),
encompasses factors such as academic and employer reputation, student-to- faculty ratio, and
citations per faculty (QS Quacquarelli Symonds Limited, 2023). Academic performance metrics
encompass several variables: Journal Citation Score, sourced from the Scopus database, which
provides a continuous measure of journal quality and output; and Duration, which measures the
span between the author's first and most recent publication, thus reflecting the length of
dedicated academic engagement in economics.

Our regression models included both linear and logarithmic transformations of citation counts
and publication numbers to address potential skewness in the data. This methodological approach
allowed us to draw nuanced conclusions about the relative impacts of solo and collaborative
authorship on the long-term academic trajectories of economists.

3
Results

Results are shown in Table 1. First, concerning Solo vs. Collaborative Authorship. Solo-authored
papers significantly enhance long-term productivity and citation impact, outperforming
collaborative efforts. Economists with early solo-authored publications show higher average
citation counts and paper counts over time.
Second, when focusing on collaborations, we find that relative to solo-authored papers,
international collaborations have a less negative impact on long-term success than national and
institutional collaborations.
Temporal Trends: The negative effects of homogeneous collaborations have deepened over time,
highlighting the growing importance of diverse and international partnerships. Post-2000, the
penalties for institutional collaborations have increased.

Concluding Remarks

For Tenure Committees: The findings suggest that solo-authored publications are strong
indicators of a candidate's research independence and long-term academic potential. Tenure
committees should recognize the significant contributions of solo-authored papers and consider
them as a key factor in tenure decisions. However, collaborative work, particularly international
collaborations, should be less heavily discounted compared to national and institutional
collaborations due to their relatively higher positive impact. Institutional collaborations should
be the most-heavily discounted.
For Individual Researchers: If institutions follow the recommendations above in their assessment
approach, early-career researchers should: Prioritize solo-authored publications to establish a
strong academic identity and demonstrate research independence. Engage in strategic
collaborations, particularly international ones, to enhance their visibility and influence without
overshadowing their individual contributions. Balance solo and collaborative efforts to optimize
their long-term academic success and meet tenure expectations.

4
Table 1: Regression Result for Citation Count and Paper Count

Log Citation Count Log Paper Count

VARIABLES
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6
Institutional Collaboration -0.550 *** -0.358 *** -0.343 *** -0.181 *** -0.082 *** -0.082 ***
(0.069) (0.057) (0.058) (0.025) (0.022) (0.022)
National Collaboration -0.229 *** -0.138 *** -0.218 *** -0.124 *** -0.049 *** -0.064 ***

(0.039) (0.033) (0.032) (0.017) (0.014) (0.015)

International Collaboration -0.451 *** -0.224 *** -0.142 *** -0.128 *** -0.001 0.048

(0.037) (0.031) (0.032) (0.016) (0.013) (0.014)

Gender (Male) 0.0464 0.072 *** 0.1001 *** 0.103 ***
(0.033) (0.032) (0.013) (0.013)
Duration 0.064 *** 0.062 *** 0.033 *** 0.033 ***
(0.002) (0.003) (0.001) (0.001)
Journal Score 0.062 *** 0.005 *** 0.002 ** 0.001
(0.003) (0.003) (0.001) (0.001)
Institution Score 0.009 *** 0.010 *** 0.005 *** 0.003 ***

Constant 5.245 *** (0.000)

3.05 *** (0.000)
3.245 *** 2.485 *** (0.000)
1.548 *** (0.000)
1.561 ***

(0.023) (0.051) (5.108) (0.010) (0.021) (0.107)

R-squared 0.028 0.339 0.379 0.017 0.304 0.323
Country FE NO NO YES NO NO YES
N 6360 6360 6360 6360 6360 6360

Note: Standard errors in parentheses, Model (1)(4): Only consider Author Type , Model (2)(5): Consider

controls without Country FE, Model (3)(6): Consider controls without Country FE. Robust standard errors in

parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1.

5
 Cited References in this Paper

Horta, H., & Santos, J. M., “The impact of publishing during PhD studies on career research
publication, visibility, and collaborations.” Research in Higher Education, 57, 28-50, 2016.

Hou, L., Q. Wu, and Y. Xie, “Does early publishing in top journals really predict long-term
scientific success in the business field?” Scientometrics, vol. 127, no. 11, pp. 6083-6107, 2022.

Lee, D. H., “Predicting the research performance of early career scientists.” Scientometrics,
121(3), 1481-1504, 2019

M. Bridgstock, “The quality of single and multiple authored papers: An unresolved problem,”
Scientometrics, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 37–48, 1991.

Note: For the sake of brevity of this paper and keep to the point, we shortened the introduction
and literature review substantially and only four most relevant papers are cited explicitly in this
paper. Complete references cited in the original work are also provided below for those who may
be interested.

6
 Complete References
Ackers, L. (2008). Internationalization, mobility, and metrics: A new form of indirect
discrimination? Minerva, 46, 411-435.

Agarwal, A., Durairajanayagam, D., Tatagari, S., Esteves, S. C., Harlev, A., Henkel, R., & Bashiri,
A. (2016). Bibliometrics: Tracking research impact by selecting the appropriate metrics. Asian
Journal of Andrology, 18(2), 296-309.

Aksnes, D. W., Piro, F. N., & Rørstad, K. (2019). Gender gaps in international research
collaboration: A bibliometric approach. Scientometrics, 120, 747-774.

Aksnes, D. W., Rørstad, K., Piro, F. N., & Sivertsen, G. (2011). Are female researchers less cited?
A large scale study of Norwegian researchers. Journal of the American Society for Information
Science and Technology, 62(4), 628-636.

Allen, L., Scott, J., Brand, A., Hlava, M., & Altman, M. (2014). Credit where credit is due. Nature,
508(7496), 312-313.

Avolio, B., Chávez, J., & Vílchez-Román, C. (2020). Factors that contribute to the
underrepresentation of women in science careers worldwide: A literature review. Social
Psychology of Education, 23, 773-794.

Baas, J., Schotten, M., Plume, A., Côté, G., & Karimi, R. (2020). Scopus as a curated, high-quality
bibliometric data source for academic research in quantitative science studies. Quantitative
Science Studies, 1(1), 377-386.

Barbezat, D. A., & Hughes, J. W. (2005). Salary structure effects and the gender pay gap in
academia. Research in Higher Education, 46(6), 621-640.

Barlow, J., Stephens, P. A., Bode, M., Cadotte, M. W., Lucas, K., Newton, E., Nuñez, M. A., &
Pettorelli, N. (2017). On the extinction of the single-authored paper: The causes and consequences
of increasingly collaborative applied ecological research. Journal of Applied Ecology, 55(1), 1-4.

Baruffaldi, S., Visentin, F., & Conti, A. (2016). The productivity of science & engineering PhD
students hired from supervisors’ networks. Research Policy, 45(4), 785-796.

7
Bauer, H. P. W., Schui, G., von Eye, A., & Krampen, G. (2013). How does scientific success
relate to individual and organizational characteristics? A scientometric study of psychology
researchers in the German-speaking countries. Scientometrics, 94(2), 523-539.

Bazeley, P. (2003). Defining 'early career' in research. Higher Education, 45(3), 257-279.

Billah, S. M., & Gauch, S. (2015). Social network analysis for predicting emerging researchers.
In 2015 7th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering
and Knowledge Management (IC3K). IEEE.

Blau, F. D., & Kahn, L. M. (2000). Gender differences in pay. Journal of Economic Perspectives,
14, 75-99.

Borrego, Á., Barrios, M., Villarroya, A., & Ollé, C. (2010). Scientific output and impact of
postdoctoral scientists: A gender perspective. Scientometrics, 83(1), 93-101.

Bozeman, B., Fay, D., & Slade, C. P. (2012). Research collaboration in universities and academic
entrepreneurship: The state-of-the-art. Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(1), 1-67.

Braithwaite, J., Herkes, J., Churruca, K., Long, J. C., Pomare, C., Boyling, C., & Westbrook, J.
(2019). Comprehensive Researcher Achievement Model (CRAM): A framework for measuring
researcher achievement, impact and influence derived from a systematic literature review of
metrics and models. BMJ Open, 9(3), e025320.

Bridgstock, M. (1991). The quality of single and multiple authored papers: An unresolved
problem. Scientometrics, 21(1), 37-48.

Broström, A. (2019). Academic breeding grounds: Home department conditions and early career
performance of academic researchers. Research Policy, 48(7), 1647-1665.

Brundin, E., Liu, F., & Cyron, T. (2022). Emotion in strategic management: A review and future
research agenda. Long Range Planning, 55(4), 102144.

Chan, H. F., Mixon, F. G., & Torgler, B. (2018). Relation of early career performance and
recognition to the probability of winning the Nobel Prize in economics. Scientometrics, 114(3),
1069-1086.

Chen, J., Liu, Q., & Kim, M. (2022). Gender gap in tenure and promotion: Evidence from the
economics Ph.D. class of 2008. Southern Economic Journal, 88(4), 1277-1312.

8
Chung, K. H., Cox, R. A., & Kim, K. A. (2009). On the relation between intellectual collaboration
and intellectual output: Evidence from the finance academe. The Quarterly Review of Economics
and Finance, 49(3), 893-916.

Costas, R., van Leeuwen, T. N., & Bordons, M. (2010). A bibliometric classificatory approach
for the study and assessment of research performance at the individual level: The effects of age
on productivity and impact. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and
Technology, 61(8), 1564-1581.

Danell, R. (2011). Can the quality of scientific work be predicted using information on the
author’s track record? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
62(1), 50-60.

Denton, M., Borrego, M., & Knight, D. B. (2022). US postdoctoral careers in life sciences,
physical sciences and engineering: Government, industry, and academia. PLoS ONE, 17(2),
e0263185.

Ding, F., Liu, Y., Chen, X., & Chen, F. (2018). Rising star evaluation in heterogeneous social
networks. IEEE Access, 6, 29436-29443.

Dorantes-Gilardi, R., Ramírez-Álvarez, A. A., & Terrazas-Santamaría, D. (2023). Is there a

differentiated gender effect of collaboration with super-cited authors? Evidence from junior
researchers in economics. Scientometrics, 128(4), 2317-2336.

Drivas, K., & Kremmydas, D. (2020). The Matthew effect of a journal’s ranking. Research Policy,
49(4), 103951.

Dundar, H., & Lewis, D. R. (1998). Determinants of research productivity in higher

education. Research in Higher Education, 39(6), 607-631.

Durieux, V., & Gevenois, P. A. (2010). Bibliometric indicators: Quality measurements of

scientific publication. Radiology, 255(2), 342-351.

Faber Frandsen, T., & Nicolaisen, J. (2022). Publishing in library and information science journals:
The success of less experienced researchers. Journal of Information Science.

García-Suaza, A., Otero, J., & Winkelmann, R. (2020). Predicting early career productivity of
PhD economists: Does advisor-match matter? Scientometrics, 122(1), 429-449.

9
Garfield, E. (1955). Citation indexes for science. Science, 122, 108-111.

Garfield, E. (2006). The history and meaning of the journal impact factor. JAMA, 295, 90-93.

González-Sauri, M., & Rossello, G. (2023). The role of early-career university prestige
stratification on the future academic performance of scholars. Research in Higher Education,
64(1), 58-94.

Hamermesh, D. S. (2018). Citations in economics: Measurement, uses, and impacts. Journal of

Economic Literature, 56(1), 115-156.

Herschberg, C., Benschop, Y., & van den Brink, M. (2018). Selecting early-career researchers:
The influence of discourses of internationalisation and excellence on formal and applied selection
criteria in academia. Higher Education, 76(5), 807-825.

Higham, K. W., Governale, M., Jaffe, A. B., & Zülicke, U. (2017). Unraveling the dynamics of
growth, aging and inflation for citations to scientific articles from specific research fields. Journal
of Informetrics, 11(4), 1190-1200.

Hilmer, N., & Hilmer, M. (2015). Faculty hiring and research performance in agricultural and
resource economics. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 97(2), 554-570.

Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings

of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(46), 16569-16572.

Horta, H., & Santos, J. M. (2016). The impact of publishing during PhD studies on career research
publication, visibility, and collaborations. Research in Higher Education, 57, 28-50.

Hurley, L. A., Ogier, A. L., & Torvik, V. I. (2013). Deconstructing the collaborative impact:
Article and author characteristics that influence citation count. Proceedings of the American
Society for Information Science and Technology, 50(1), 1-10.

Kosmulski, M. (2020). Nobel laureates are not hot. Scientometrics, 123(1), 487-495.

Kuld, L., & O’Hagan, J. (2018). Rise of multi-authored papers in economics: Demise of the ‘lone
star’ and why? Scientometrics, 114(3), 1207-1225.

Kwiek, M., & Roszka, W. (2022). Are female scientists less inclined to publish alone? The gender
solo research gap. Scientometrics, 127(4), 1697-1735.

10
Laurance, W. F., Goosem, M., & Laurance, S. G. W. (2007). Predictors of research productivity
in tropical ecology and conservation: An international comparison. Biotropica, 39(3), 327-338.

Laurance, W. F., Useche, D. C., Laurance, S. G., & Bradshaw, C. J. A. (2013). Predicting
publication success for biologists. BioScience, 63(10), 817-823.

Lee, D. H. (2019). Predicting the research performance of early career scientists. Scientometrics,
121(3), 1481-1504.

Lehmann, S., Jackson, A. D., & Lautrup, B. E. (2006). Measures for measures. Nature, 444, 1003.

Lindahl, J. (2018). Predicting research excellence at the individual level: The importance of
publication rate, top journal publications, and top 10% publications in the case of early career
mathematicians. Journal of Informetrics, 12(2), 518-533.

Lindahl, J., Colliander, C., & Danell, R. (2020). Early career performance and its correlation with
gender and publication output during doctoral education. Scientometrics, 122(1), 309-330.

Liu, J., Tang, T., Kong, X., Tolba, A., Al-Makhadmeh, Z., & Xia, F. (2018). Understanding the
advisor–advisee relationship via scholarly data analysis. Scientometrics, 116(1), 161-180.

Liénard, J. F., Achakulvisut, T., Acuna, D. E., & David, S. V. (2018). Intellectual synthesis in
mentorship determines success in academic careers. Nature Communications, 9(1), 4840.

McLeod, B. M. (1986). The social psychological adaptation of immigrant Chinese professionals

in California's Silicon Valley. University of California, Santa Cruz.

Milojević, S., Radicchi, F., & Walsh, J. P. (2018). Changing demographics of scientific careers:
The rise of the temporary workforce. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(50),
12616-12623.

Mishra, V., & Smyth, R. (2013). Are more senior academics really more research productive than
junior academics? Evidence from Australian law schools. Scientometrics, 96(2), 411-425.

New York University. (2020, July 31). List of leading journals for economics faculty. Retrieved
from https://www.stern.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/assets/documents/Econ%20Top%20Journals
%20-%20July%202020.pdf

11
Nicholas, D., Boukacem-Zeghmouri, C., Rodríguez-Bravo, B., Xu, J., Watkinson, A., Abrizah,
A., Herman, E., & Świgoń, M. (2017). Where and how early career researchers find scholarly
information.

Parchomovsky, G. (2000). Publish or perish. Michigan Law Review, 98(4), 926-952.

Prpić, K. (2000). The publication productivity of young scientists: An empirical

study. Scientometrics, 49(3), 453-490.

Quaia, E., & Vernuccio, F. (2022). The H index myth: A form of fanaticism or a simple
misconception? Tomography, 8(3), 1241-1243.

Saygitov, R. T. (2014). The impact of funding through the RF President’s Grants for Young
Scientists (the field—medicine) on research productivity: A quasi-experimental study and a brief
systematic review. PLoS ONE, 9(1), e86969.

Sebo, P. (2021). Performance of gender detection tools: A comparative study of name-to-gender

inference services. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 109(3), 414-421.

Shanghai University of Finance and Economics. (2016, December 22). Journal classification
directory ratified by the Sixth Academic Committee at its fifth full meeting. Retrieved
from https://econ.sufe.edu.cn/6992/list.htm

Sinatra, R., Wang, D., Deville, P., Song, C., & Barabási, A.-L. (2016). Quantifying the evolution
of individual scientific impact. Science, 354, aaf5239.

Strotmann, A., Zhao, D., & Bubela, T. (2009). Author name disambiguation for collaboration
network analysis and visualization. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science
and Technology, 46(1), 1-20.

Van Dijk, D., Manor, O., & Carey, L. B. (2014). Publication metrics and success on the academic
job market. Current Biology, 24(11), R516-R517.

Wang, D., Song, C., & Barabási, A.-L. (2013). Quantifying long-term scientific impact. Science,
342, 127-132.

Wang, Y., Jones, B. F., & Wang, D. (2019). Early-career setback and future career impact. Nature
Communications, 10(1), 1-10.

12
Zeng, A., Shen, Z., Zhou, J., Wu, J., Fan, Y., Wang, Y., & Stanley, H. E. (2017). The science of
science: From the perspective of complex systems. Physics Reports, 714.

Zhao, Z., Bu, Y., Kang, L., Min, C., Bian, Y., Tang, L., & Li, J. (2020). An investigation of the
relationship between scientists’ mobility to/from China and their research performance. Journal
of Informetrics, 14(2), 101037.

13