Transitivity, reciprocity and contact duration are relevant for researchers' identification of new potential collaboration partners at face-to-face events, as the editorial reports of Eberle et al.¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr?·q2
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? Researchers select new collaboration partners in ways where transitivity, reciprocity and contact duration are relevant, per the editorial's report of Eberle et al. → Sanna Järvelä · Carolyn Rosé 2021
Evidence¶
Sanna Järvelä · Carolyn Rosé 2021¶
Sanna Järvelä · Carolyn Rosé. (2021). Forms of collaboration matters: CSCL across the contexts. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn (2021) 16:145–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-021-09348-4
q2 · i? · causal · r?
The editorial reports the Eberle et al. study, an intervention study at two CSCL events covering "5736 relations between 287 research- ers" according to the article text, using "RFID devices", questionnaire data and "RSiena and meta-analyses". The editorial prints no effect size for this finding.
"Data was analysed using RSiena and meta-analyses. The results showed that transitivity, reci- procity and contact duration are relevant for the identification of new potential collabora- tion partners."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- PhD students and Information Technology researchers were selected less often as new collaboration partners, and group awareness support balanced the disciplinary difference, per the editorial's report of Eberle et al.
- Transitivity predicts the initiation of new potential collaborations at scientific events — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
- Longer face-to-face contact during a scientific event increases the likelihood that a researcher selects the other as a new potential collaboration partner — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
- Reciprocity predicts the initiation of new potential collaborations at scientific events — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
- Face-to-face contact durations at scientific events follow a heavy-tailed distribution, with 20-second contacts most common — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
transitivity-reciprocity-contact-duration-collaboration-partners |
title |
Transitivity, reciprocity and contact duration are relevant for researchers' identification of new potential collaboration partners at face-to-face events, as the editorial reports of Eberle et al. |
description |
Transitivity, reciprocity and contact duration are relevant for researchers' identification of new potential collaboration partners at face-to-face events, as the editorial reports of Eberle et al. |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2021 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-18 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — sanna-järvelä-carolyn-rosé-2021 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.