International Research Collaboration: Novelty, Conventionality, and Atypicality in Knowledge Recombination

TL;DR

This study investigates whether international research collaboration leads to more novel or conventional knowledge, finding that such collaboration tends to produce less novel and more conventional work, possibly due to communication barriers and reputation effects.

Contribution

It provides empirical evidence that international collaboration does not necessarily increase research novelty, challenging assumptions about diversity fostering creativity.

Findings

International collaboration produces less novel research.

International work is more conventional in knowledge combinations.

Higher citations may be driven by larger author and audience networks.

Abstract

Research articles produced through international collaboration are more highly cited than other work, but are they also more novel? Using measures developed by Uzzi et al. (2013), and replicated by Boyack and Klavans (2014), this article tests for novelty and conventionality in international research collaboration. Scholars have found that coauthored articles are more novel and have suggested that diverse groups have a greater chance of producing creative work. As such, we expected to find that international collaboration tends to produce more novel research. Using data from Web of Science and Scopus in 2005, we failed to show that international collaboration tends to produce more novel articles. In fact, international collaboration appears to produce less novel and more conventional knowledge combinations. Transaction costs and communication barriers to international collaboration may suppress novelty. Higher citations to international work may be explained by an audience effect, where more authors from more countries results in greater access to a larger citing community. The findings are consistent with explanations of growth in international collaboration that posit a social dynamic of preferential attachment based upon reputation.