Causal asymmetry suggests productivity underlies scientific collaboration

Clicks: 14
ID: 333204
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #136 of 151 articles by views in PNAS nexus

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 151 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Scientific productivity and collaboration are closely related, yet the causal direction between these two dimensions of academic careers remains unclear. Here we analyze the careers of 26,876 Brazilian researchers holding a nationally prestigious fellowship across multiple disciplines to test whether productivity shapes collaboration or the reverse. Focusing on total publications and distinct coauthors, we assess their directional relationship using a causal discovery framework based on asymmetries in conditional and distributional structure to determine the more plausible generative direction. Collaboration conditioned on productivity exhibits a highly regular mean-variance relation consistent with a geometric model, whereas the reverse conditioning yields a much less coherent pattern. Consistently, publication counts follow a lognormal distribution, whereas the coauthor distribution is reproduced by a geometric-lognormal mixture where productivity determines the expected number of collaborators. Surrogate tests indicate that the data are considerably more compatible with productivity shaping collaboration than with the reverse. The two quantities also accumulate asymmetrically: publication inequality rises steadily with career age, whereas coauthor inequality does not, indicating that advantage compounds more in output than in network breadth. Area-resolved analyses reveal a more nuanced picture, and although the direction where collaboration shapes productivity is never favored, the two directions are most clearly distinguished in areas more organized around laboratory and research-group models, where productivity inequality also grows most clearly. Among this cohort of prominent scientists, larger collaboration networks are thus more likely to reflect cumulative advantage in productivity than to independently generate greater output.
Reference Key
openalex_W7220946896 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Diego A. Frota, Cesar I. N. Sampaio Filho, Vítor Hugo Ribeiro, Germano F. C. Luz, Humberto A. Carmona, Matjaz Perc, Haroldo Valentin Ribeiro, José S. Andrade
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal PNAS nexus
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/pnasnexus/pgag360
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgag360
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.