China and the United States have enjoyed a long peroid of scientific col-laboration. However, the economic sanctions imposed by the U.S. govern-ment on China since 2018 appear to have disrupted this productive rela-tionship. This study examines the potential impact of these sanctions on China-U.S. scientific collaboration, using the seven civilian universities, commonly referred to as SSND, as a case study. Drawing on scientific pub-lication data from the Web of Science spanning more than 20 years, we as-sess how political tensions may have affected collaboration among indi-vidual researchers in both countries. Preliminary analysis of over 300,000 records suggests that, following China’s entry into the World Trade Organi-zation (WTO) and especially around the time of the 2008 Beijing Olympics, SSND universities formed increasingly strong partnerships with U.S. insti-tutions, benefiting researchers in both nations. However, after the U.S. gov-ernment issued the Entity List to restrict trade with Chinese companies and even civilian universities, SSND institutions—representative of many Chinese universities affected by the sanctions—showed a significant de-cline in collaborations with U.S. affiliations. Instead, they shifted toward partnerships with domestic organizations and institutions in other coun-tries. From a publication output perspective, these sanctions have negative-ly impacted not only Chinese researchers but also their close American col-laborators.

Scientific collaboration empowers scholars to build larger teams and produce more high-quality knowledge. However, with insufficient microscopic examination of scientific collaboration, i.e., the interactions between collaborators, little is currently known about whether the contributing roles of collaborators are fairly and accurately represented on the bylines of scientific papers. To fill this gap, the current study examines how the different roles of collaborators are connected to the order of their names in article bylines across disciplines and team sizes. A dataset of 105,192 articles containing author contribution statements was compiled and analyzed to investigate the byline order distributions of three different contributing roles: versatiles, specialists, and teamplayers. We discovered that, across all disciplines, the order of names in article bylines usually represented authors’ contributions. Versatiles were more likely to be first authors in the byline, followed by teamplayers and specialists. We also found that the division of labor in larger teams varied between disciplines. In some subjects, the three contributing roles disappeared as the size of teams increased, while in others, they remained distinct. Finally, larger team sizes were associated with a weaker relationship between byline ordering and contributing roles. These findings advance studies of scientific collaboration and enrich the literature on the evaluation of scientific performance.

基于文献题录数据和引文数据的传统文献计量研究存在着诸多的障碍和壁垒。随着自然语言处理技术的发展和学术文献全文数据特别是结构化全文数据的丰富，这些障碍和壁垒在不断被攻克。通过综述学术文献全文的计量分析的相关研究，本文发现：学术文献的计量研究正在经历巨大转变——从学术文献的外部特征到开始关注内容特征、从关注学术文献的句法特征到语义特征乃至语用特征。以引文内容分析为代表的学术文献全文计量分析研究发展突出，其他全文信息的计量分析工作也崭露头角。目前，全文计量分析研究各个研究方向的发展参差不齐，部分研究方向尚处于萌芽阶段，相关研究的研究方法和数据仍待继续丰富。在未来，全文计量分析研究需要多个学科的广泛参与和相互合作，出版商与学者也需积极参与到全文研究中来。我们应当对学术文献进行更加全面的认识，从而推动全文计量分析向客体细粒度化、视角多样化、指标语义化和评价结果全面化等方向不断迈进，并促进全文计量分析与学术服务和学术评价工作的有机结合，使得文献计量学能够更好地为学术活动而服务。图：4，表：1，参考文献：167。