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

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1804.09070 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/1804.09070/

## Key facts

- Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 24 Apr 2018.

## 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)
- [Predicting article quality scores with machine learning: The UK Research Excellence Framework](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.05415/) (2022)
- [Has China caught up to the US in AI research? An exploration of mimetic isomorphism as a model for late industrializers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.10198/) (2023)
- [Mapping the Evolution of Research Contributions using KnoVo](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.17508/) (2025)
- [Artificial intelligence technologies to support research assessment: A review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.06574/) (2022)
- [Internationalizing AI: Evolution and Impact of Distance Factors](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.01231/) (2021)
- [Forecasting Conceptual Diffusion in Science: The Case of Quantum Computing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.03919/) (2026)
- [Exploring the relationship between team institutional composition and novelty in academic papers based on fine-grained knowledge entities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.31058/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

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.