# Team size matters: Collaboration and scientific impact since 1900

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1410.8544 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/1410.8544/

## Key facts

- Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 30 Oct 2014.

## Built on by (most cited first, 8 of 8)

- [Team Power Dynamics and Team Impact: New Perspectives on Scientific Collaboration using Career Age as a Proxy for Team Power](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.04108/) (2021)
- [Promoting Research Collaboration with Open Data Driven Team Recommendation in Response to Call for Proposals](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.09404/) (2023)
- [Predicting the clinical citation count of biomedical papers using multilayer perceptron neural network](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.06346/) (2022)
- [Artificial intelligence technologies to support research assessment: A review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.06574/) (2022)
- [BioMedJImpact: A Comprehensive Dataset and LLM Pipeline for AI Engagement and Scientific Impact Analysis of Biomedical Journals](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.12821/) (2025)
- [Internationalizing AI: Evolution and Impact of Distance Factors](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.01231/) (2021)
- [Time to Cite: Modeling Citation Networks using the Dynamic Impact Single-Event Embedding Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.00032/) (2024)
- [Smaller, Younger, and More Impactful: How AI-Assisted Writing Transforms Research Teams](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.27404/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

This paper provides the first historical analysis of the relationship between collaboration and scientific impact, using three indicators of collaboration (number of authors, number of addresses, and number of countries) and including articles published between 1900 and 2011. The results demonstrate that an increase in the number of authors leads to an increase in impact--from the beginning of the last century onwards--and that this is not simply due to self-citations. A similar trend is also observed for the number of addresses and number of countries represented in the byline of an article. However, the constant inflation of collaboration since 1900 has resulted in diminishing citation returns: larger and more diverse (in terms of institutional and country affiliation) teams are necessary to realize higher impact. The paper concludes with a discussion of the potential causes of the impact gain in citations of collaborative papers.