Abstract:Based on publications indexed in the Web of Science, the current study focused on internationally collaborated publications and publications acknowledging government funding of developing and developed countries including China, the US, Germany, the Netherlands, South Africa, and Brazil. Specific focus is placed on national funding agencies (i.e., focal agencies) supporting competitive research in science. The focal agencies of the six countries include the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC), the US National Science Foundation (NSF), German Research Foundation, the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO), National Research Foundation of South Africa (NRF), and National Council for Scientific and Technological Development of Brazil (CNPq). Results show that different countries vary in arrangement of government funding sources in support of competitive research projects. China and Brazil are centralized to the NSFC and CNPq, whereas the remaining four countries have relatively decentralized sources. The six focal national funding agencies of the current study are more efficient than non-focal agencies in raising citation impact, with the NWO, NSF, and NSFC perform better than non-focal agencies of corresponding countries. International collaboration improves citation impact, with the developing countries benefit more. Authorship (first or corresponding authorship) also plays a role in international collaboration. Collaboration led by authors from developed countries has a positive effect whereas that led by authors from developing countries usually have negative effects on citation impact. Interaction between funding and collaboration may have results different from those when these two factors are considered separately, which suggests being cautious while discussing effects of either of the two factors.

Does collaboration bring high-impact studies? A preliminary study.

Collaboration Size and Citation Impact in Big Data Research.

Collaboration Diversity and Scientific Impact

Team formation and team impact: The balance between team freshness and repeat collaboration

Collaboration Signatures Reveal Scientific Impact

The Correlation Between Scientific Collaboration and Citation Count at the Paper Level: a Meta-Analysis

Is together better? Examining scientific collaborations across multiple authors, institutions, and departments

How are collaboration and productivity correlated at various career stages of scientists?

Mutual Influence in Citation and Cooperation Patterns

Academic collaboration rates and citation associations vary substantially between countries and fields

Impactful scientists have higher tendency to involve collaborators in new topics

Analyzing scientific collaboration with “giants” based on the milestones of career: Analyzing Scientific Collaboration with “Giants” based on the Milestones of Career

Analysis of effects to scientific impact indicators based on the coevolution of coauthorship and citation networks

A Comparative Study of Domestic and Cross‐country Impact of Chinese and U.S. Publications in Chemistry

Standing on the shoulders of giants: the effect of outstanding scientists on young collaborators’ careers

Toward scientific collaboration: A cost-benefit perspective

Collaborative Characteristics and Networks of National, Institutional and Individual Contributors Using Highly Cited Articles in Environmental Engineering in Science Citation Index Expanded

An In-Depth Analysis of Government Funding and International Collaboration in Scientific Research

The relationship between interdisciplinarity and citation impact-a novel perspective on citation accumulation

Correlated Impact Dynamics in Science

Twodimensional Measurement for Academic Influence of Researchers:Integration of Citation Impact and Collaboration Impact