图书情报工作

图书情报工作 >

2022 , Vol. 66 >Issue 4: 45 - 55

DOI: https://doi.org/10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2022.04.005

理论研究

科研团队学:内涵、进展与展望

  • 黄颖 ,
  • 李瑞婻 ,
  • 刘晓婷 ,
  • 张琳
展开
  • 1. 武汉大学信息管理学院 武汉 430072;
    2. 武汉大学科教管理与评价中心 武汉 430072;
    3. 比利时鲁汶大学ECOOM研究中心 鲁汶 B-3000
黄颖,副教授,博士,博士生导师;李瑞婻,博士研究生;刘晓婷,博士研究生。

收稿日期: 2021-07-09

  修回日期: 2021-10-20

  网络出版日期: 2022-03-01

基金资助

本文系国家青年科学基金项目"基于多源异构数据的新兴技术演化路径识别与预测研究"（项目编号：72004169）和国家自然科学基金面上项目"科研人员职业生涯的性别差异和影响机理研究：合作、流动与学术表现"（项目编号：71974150）研究成果之一。

收起

Science of Team Science (SciTS): Connotations, Progress and Prospects

  • Huang Ying ,
  • Li Ruinan ,
  • Liu Xiaoting ,
  • Zhang Lin
Expand
  • 1. School of Information Management, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072;
    2. Center for Science, Technology & Education Assessment, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072;
    3. Centre for R&D Monitoring, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven B-3000, Belgium

Received date: 2021-07-09

  Revised date: 2021-10-20

  Online published: 2022-03-01

Fold

摘要

[目的/意义] 团队协作被认为是解决复杂科学和社会挑战的有效方法之一，通过明晰团队与团队科学的相关概念，系统梳理科研团队学这一新兴交叉领域的发展进程及现状，以期深化相关学者对该领域的认知与理解。[方法/过程] 应用科学计量、系统综述、知识图谱等方法，在厘清团队与团队科学相关概念及内涵的基础上，梳理科研团队学的兴起和演化，进而从研究方法、研究工具、主要研究内容三个方面出发，总结当前科研团队学领域的主要研究进展，并对未来可能的发展方向进行展望和讨论。[结果/结论] 科研团队学这一新兴的跨学科领域综合利用多种定量与定性研究方法，在科研团队学的理论与模型、团队的特征与运行、团队的组织与发展、团队的测度与评估四个方面已有显著进展，未来该领域在定量研究方面潜在的努力方向主要包括：聚焦科研团队合作过程和结果，识别和量化团队效能影响因素；关注不同学科领域的团队合作特征，探索团队科学定量评估方法；关联交叉科学领域的研究成果与发现，探讨最佳团队合作模式；借鉴科学计量学理论与方法，加深对团队科学发展规律的认识和理解。

关键词： 团队科学; 科研团队学; 科研团队; SciTS; 跨学科研究

本文引用格式

黄颖 , 李瑞婻 , 刘晓婷 , 张琳 . 科研团队学:内涵、进展与展望[J]. 图书情报工作, 2022 , 66(4) : 45 -55 . DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2022.04.005

Abstract

[Purpose/significance] Nowadays, team collaboration is considered one of the effective ways to solve the complex scientific and social challenges. By clarifying the related concepts of team and team science, this paper systematically sorts out the development process and status of the emerging interdisciplinary field of SciTS. This paper aims to deepen the related researchers' understanding of the SciTS.[Method/process] Employing the methods of bibliometrics, systematic review and knowledge graph, based on clarifying the concepts and connotations of the team and team science, this paper reviewed the development and evolution of SciTS, summarized the current research progress in SciTS from three aspects of research methods, research tools and research contents, and then discussed the possible future development directions.[Result/conclusion] SciTS, an emerging interdisciplinary field, integrates various quantitative and qualitative research methods and has made significant progress in four areas:theories and models of team science, characteristics and operation of team, organization and development of team, and measurement and evaluation of team. In the future, the potential quantitative research directions in this area can be summarized as the following four aspects:1) focusing on the collaboration process and results of research teams and identifying and quantifying the influencing factors of team effectiveness; 2) revealing the characteristics of team cooperation in different disciplines and exploring the scientific quantitative evaluation methods of the team; 3) associating the research results and discoveries in the interdisciplinary field and exploring the best team cooperation mode; 4) introducing theories and methods of scientometrics and deepening the understanding of the development law of team science.

Key words： team science; science of team science; research team; SciTS; interdisciplinary research

参考文献

[1] 王维, 邱晓刚, 张鹏. 科学团队理论及其对大型仿真研究的启示[J]. 系统仿真技术, 2013, 9(1):45-51.
[2] 武夷山. 瑞士艺术科学院的"跨学科研究奖"[EB/OL].[2021-09-26]. http://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-1557-1118675.html.
[3] NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL. Enhancing the effectiveness of team science[M]. Washington, DC:National Academies Press, 2015.
[4] FALK-KRZESINSKI H, CONTRACTOR N, FIORE S, et al. Mapping a research agenda for the science of team science[J]. Research evaluation, 2011, 20(2):145-158.
[5] ALCHIAN A, DEMSETZ H. Production, information costs, and economic organization[J]. The American economic review, 1972, 62(5):777-795.
[6] 罗宾斯. 管理学[M]. 北京:中国人民大学出版社, 2003.
[7] 高虹, 王济干. 基于内容分析法的创新团队内涵解析[J]. 科技管理研究, 2014, 34(10):87-94.
[8] REY-ROCHA J, GARZóN-GARCíA B, MARTíN-SEMPERE J. Scientists' performance and consolidation of research teams in biology and biomedicine at the Spanish council for scientific research[J]. Scientometrics, 2006, 69(2):183-212.
[9] LIU Y, WU Y, ROUSSEAU S, et al. Reflections on and a short review of the science of team science[J]. Scientometrics, 2020, 125(2):937-950.
[10] YU S, BEDRU H, LEE I, et al. Science of scientific team science:a survey[J]. Computer science review, 2019, 31:72-83.
[11] WUCHTY S, JONES B, UZZI B. The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge[J]. Science, 2007, 316(5827):1036-1039.
[12] FITZPATRICK J. Team science and team research:how are they the same?[J]. Applied nursing research, 2017, 38:179.DOI:10.1016/j.apnr.2017.10.019.
[13] LITTLE M, ST HILL C, WARE K, et al. Team science as interprofessional collaborative research practice:a systematic review of the science of team science literature[J]. Journal of investigative medicine, 2017, 65(1):15-22.
[14] HALL K L, VOGEL A L, HUANG G C, et al. The science of team science:a review of the empirical evidence and research gaps on collaboration in science[J]. American psychologist, 2018, 73(4):532-548.
[15] 武夷山. 团队科学论所要回答的问题[EB/OL].[2021-03-16]. http://blog.sciencenet.cn/home.php?mod=space&uid=1557&do=blog&id=887422
[16] NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. Facilitating interdisciplinary research[M]. Washington, DC:National Academies Press, 2005.
[17] STOKOLS D, HALL K, TAYLOR B, et al. The science of team science:overview of the field and introduction to the supplement[J]. American journal of preventive medicine, 2008, 35(S2):S77-89.
[18] 杨书卷. SCiTS:"研发群体"科学的兴起[J]. 科技导报, 2011, (11):7.
[19] 廖青云, 朱东华, 汪雪锋, 等. 科研团队的多样性对团队绩效的影响研究[J]. 科学学研究, 2021, 39(6):1074-1083.
[20] FALK-KRZESINSKI H, BÖRNER K, CONTRACTOR N, et al. Advancing the science of team science[J]. Clinical and translational science, 2010, 3(5):263-266.
[21] RAFOLS I, PORTER A, LEYDESDORFF L. Science overlay maps:a new tool for research policy and library management[J]. Journal of the American society for information science and technology, 2010, 61(9):1871-1887.
[22] BEDWELL W, WILDMAN J, DIAZGRANADOS D, et al. Collaboration at work:an integrative multilevel conceptualization[J]. Human resource management review, 2012, 22(2):128-145.
[23] COSTA M. The interdependence of scientists in the era of team science:an exploratory study using temporal network analysis[D]. New York:Syracuse University, 2016.
[24] RAMOS-VILLAGRASA P, MARQUES-QUINTEIRO P, NAVARRO J, et al. Teams as complex adaptive systems:reviewing 17 years of research[J]. Small group research, 2018, 49(2):135-176.
[25] BEYERLEIN M, HAN S, PRASAD A. A multilevel model of collaboration and creativity[M]//REITER-PALMON R. Team creativity and innovation. Oxford:Oxford University Press, 2018:195-224.
[26] VICO E, HALLONSTEN O. A resource-and impact-based micro-level conceptualization of collaborative academic work[J]. Aslib journal of information management, 2017, 69(5):624-639.
[27] TAVEL M, MARKOVITS D. An epigenetic model of team-driven innovation[C]//Proceedings of the 7th annual international science of team science (SciTS) conference. Phoenix:Mayo Clinic, 2016:55.
[28] LAWLESS W. A thermodynamics of interdependence-science, scientists, and scientific teams[C]//Proceedings of the 7th annual international science of team science (SciTS) conference. Phoenix:Mayo Clinic, 2016:83.
[29] WOOTEN K. The use of paradox to study, understand, and develop scientific teams[C]//Proceedings of the 8th annual international science of team science (SciTS) conference. Florida:University of Central Florida, 2017:44-45.
[30] HARA N, SOLOMON P, KIM S, et al. An emerging view of scientific collaboration:scientists' perspectives on collaboration and factors that impact collaboration[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science Technology, 2003, 54(10):952-965.
[31] PALETZ S. Multidisciplinary teamwork and big data[C]//Proceedings of the 2014 workshop on human centered big data research. New York:Association for Computing Machinery, 2014:32-35.
[32] PATEL H, PETTITT M, WILSON J. Factors of collaborative working:a framework for a collaboration model[J]. Applied ergonomics, 2012, 43(1):1-26.
[33] LAPPAS T, LIU K, TERZI E. Finding a team of experts in social networks[C]//Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. New York:ACM, 2009.
[34] DRISKELL J, SALAS E, DRISKELL T. Foundations of teamwork and collaboration[J]. American psychologist, 2018, 73(4):334-348.
[35] BENNETT M, LEVINEFINLEY S, GADLIN H. Collaboration & team science:a field guide[C]//Digital poster presented at the first global conference on research integration and implementation. Canberra:Australian National University, 2013:1-15.
[36] KOZSLOWSKI S, BELL B. Work groups and teams in organizations:review update[J]. Handbook of psychology, 2013, 12:412-469.
[37] FERNANDEZ R, SHAH S, ROSENMAN E, et al. Developing team cognition:a role for simulation[J]. Simulation in healthcare:journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare, 2017, 12(2):96-103.
[38] BILLINGS H, SMITH G, WEAVERS K, et al. Delivering the right education, training and resources at the right time to support the development and progress of multidisciplinary translational research teams in an academic health center[C]//Proceedings of the 6th annual international science of team science conference. Bethesda:National Institutes of Health, 2015:64-65.
[39] LYALL C, BRUCE A, MARSDEN W, et al. The role of funding agencies in creating interdisciplinary knowledge[J]. Science public policy, 2013, 40(1):62-71.
[40] BANAL-ESTANOL A, MACHO-STADLER I, PéREZ-CASTRILLO D. Key success drivers in public research grants:funding the seeds of radical innovation in academia?[EB/OL] [2021-03-21].https:citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.728.2453.
[41] SALAZAR M, DIAZGRANADOS D, LANT T, et al. Enhancing team science effectiveness through team training[C]//Proceedings of the 8th annual international science of team science conference. Florida:University of Central Florida, 2017:19.
[42] FIORE S, HOLT V, MCCORMACK W, et al. Learning and training for team science[EB/OL].[2020-09-16]. https://www.scienceofteamscience.org/2013-sessions--learning-and-training-for-team-science.
[43] KHURI S, WUCHTY S. Core competencies in team science[C]//Proceedings of the 6th annual international science of team science conference. Bethesda:National Institutes of Health (NIH), 2015:15.
[44] MOORE A. A team science approach to leadership development[C]//Proceedings of the 7th annual international science of team science conference. Phoenix:Mayo Clinic, 2016:88-89.
[45] SCHULTZ J, BURGOYNE S, BALAKRISHNAN B, et al. SciCom meets SciTS. interdisciplinary teamwork for science communication training[C]//Proceedings of the 10th annual international science of team science conference. Michigan:Michigan State University, 2019:48-50.
[46] STOKOLS D. Training the next generation of transdisciplinarians[J]. Enhancing communication collaboration in interdisciplinary research, 2014:56-81.
[47] WOOLLEY A, AGGARWAL I, MALONE T. Collective intelligence and group performance[J]. Current directions in psychological science, 2015, 24(6):420-424.
[48] WOOLLEY A, CHABRIS C, PENTLAND A, et al. Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups[J]. Science, 2010, 330(6004):686-688.
[49] CROSS J, LOVE H. Research team performance[EB/OL].[2021-03-21]. https://i2insights.org/2017/01/17/research-team-performance/.
[50] SALAZAR M, LANT T, DEMICHELE A, et al. Measuring integrative capacity in interdisciplinary teams:scale development and testing[C]//Proceedings of the 6th annual international science of team science conference. Bethesda:National Institutes of Health (NIH), 2015:99-100.
[51] MARTíN-ALCáZAR F, RUIZ-MARTíNEZ M, SáNCHEZ-GARDEY G. Assessing social capital in academic research teams:a measurement instrument proposal[J]. Scientometrics, 2019, 121(2):917-935.
[52] FREY B, LOHMEIER J, LEE S, et al. Measuring collaboration among grant partners[J]. American journal of evaluation, 2006, 27(3):383-392.
[53] 张松, 张国栋, 王亚光. 生命周期视角下新兴学科的生命发展评价研究[J]. 科学学研究, 2018, 36(05):776-782.
[54] 梁立明, 武夷山. 简介科学计量学[EB/OL].[2021-09-27]. http://blog.sciencenet.cn/home.php?mod=space&uid=1557&do=blog&id=19355.
Options
文章导航

/

〈 〉