  Co-authorship networks, where nodes represent authors and edges represent
co-authorship relations, are key to understanding the production and diffusion
of knowledge in academia. Social constructs, biases (implicit and explicit),
and constraints (e.g. spatial, temporal) affect who works with whom and cause
co-authorship networks to organise into tight communities with different levels
of segregation. We aim to look at aspects of the co-authorship network
structure that lead to segregation and its impact on scientific production. We
measure segregation using the Spectral Segregation Index (SSI) and find 4
ordered segregation categories: completely segregated, highly segregated,
moderately segregated and non-segregated communities. We direct our attention
to the non-segregated and highly segregated communities, quantifying and
comparing their structural topologies and k-core positions. When considering
communities of both categories (controlling for size), our results show no
differences in density and clustering but substantial variability in core
position. Larger non-segregated communities are more likely to occupy cores
near the network nucleus, while the highly segregated ones tend to be closer to
the network periphery. Finally, we analyse differences in citations gained by
researchers within communities showing different segregation categories.
Researchers in highly segregated communities get more citations from their
community members in middle cores and gain more citations per publication in
middle/periphery cores. Those in non-segregated communities get more citations
per publication in the nucleus. To our knowledge, this work is the first to
characterise community segregation in co-authorship networks and investigate
the relationship between community segregation and author citations.
