Diffusion of Nanotechnology Knowledge in Turkey and Its Network Structure

Darvish, Hamid and Tonta, Yaşar Diffusion of Nanotechnology Knowledge in Turkey and Its Network Structure. published online first (Springer), 2016. (In Press) [Journal article (Paginated)]

[img] Text

Download (2MB)

English abstract

This paper aims to assess the diffusion and adoption of nanotechnology knowledge within the Turkish scientific community using social network analysis (SNA) and bibliometrics. We retrieved a total of 10,062 records of nanotechnology papers authored by Turkish researchers between 2000 and 2011 from Web of Science (WoS) and divided the data set into two 6-year periods. We analyzed the most prolific and collaborative authors and universities on individual, institutional and international levels based on their network properties (e.g., centrality) as well as the nanotechnology research topics studied most often by the Turkish researchers. We used co-word analysis and mapping to identify the major nanotechnology research fields in Turkey on the basis of the co-occurrence of words in the titles of papers. We found that nanotechnology research and development (R&D) in Turkey is on the rise and its diffusion and adoption have increased tremendously thanks to the Turkish government’s decision a decade ago identifying nanotechnology as a strategic field and providing constant support since then. Turkish researchers tend to collaborate within their own groups or universities and the overall connectedness of the network is thus low. Their publication and collaboration patterns conform to Lotka’s law. They work mainly on nanotechnology applications in Materials Sciences, Chemistry and Physics, among others. This is commensurate, more or less, with the global trends in nanotechnology research and development.

Item type: Journal article (Paginated)
Keywords: Country-level studies, Mapping and visualization, Social Network Analysis
Subjects: B. Information use and sociology of information > BG. Information dissemination and diffusion.
Depositing user: prof. yasar tonta
Date deposited: 02 Sep 2016 07:49
Last modified: 02 Sep 2016 07:49
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/28938


"SEEK" links will first look for possible matches inside E-LIS and query Google Scholar if no results are found.

Aydogan-Duda, N. (2012). Nanotechnology: A descriptive account. Making it to the forefront in Aydogan-Duda, N. (Ed). Nanotechnology: A Developing Country Perspective (pp. 1-4). New York: Springer.

Aydogan-Duda, N. & Şener, I. (2010). Entry barriers to the nanotechnology industry in Turkey in Ekekwe, N. (Ed). Nanotechnology and Microelectronics: Global Diffusion, Economics and Policy. (pp. 167-173). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

Barabasi, A.L. & Albert, R. (1999). Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science Magazine, 286(5439), 509-512.

Börner, K., Sanyal S., & Vespignani, A. (2007). Network science. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 41(1), 537–607.

Bozkurt, A. (2015, January). Türkiye, 10 yıldır “en küçük” dünyanın farkında, artık büyük adımlar atması gerekiyor (Turkey is aware of the “smallest” world for 10 years, but it should take big steps). Bilişim: Aylık Bilişim Kültürü Dergisi , 43(172), 44-53. Retrieved June 6, 2015 from: http://www.bilisimdergisi.org/s172/pages/s172_web.pdf.

Braun, T., Schubert, A. & Zsindely, S. (1997). Nanoscience and nanotechnology on the balance. Scientometrics, 38(2), 321-325.

Callon, M., Courtial, J.P., Turner, W.A., & Bauin, S. (1983). From translations to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis. Social Science Information, 22(2), 191-235.

Centrality. (2015). Retrieved, January 20, 2015, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrality.

Chen, C. (2004). Searching for intellectual turning points: Progressive knowledge domain visualization. PNAS, 101(Suppl. 1), 5303-5310.

Chen, C. (2006) CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57, 359¬ 377.

Chen, C., Chen, Y., Horowitz, M., Hou, H., Liu, Z., & Pellegrino, D. (2009). Towards an explanatory and computational theory of scientific discovery. Journal of Informetrics, 3(3), 191-209.

Darvish, H. (2014). Assessing the diffusion of nanotechnology in Turkey: A social network analysis approach. Unpublished PhD dissertation. Hacettepe University, Ankara.

Darvish, H.R. & Tonta, Y. (2015a). The diffusion of nanotechnology knowledge in Turkey. In Salah, A.A. et al. (eds.) Proceedings of ISSI 2015 Istanbul: 15th International Society of Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference, Istanbul, Turkey, 29 June to 4 July, 2015 (pp. 720-731). İstanbul: Boğaziçi University.

Darvish, H.R. & Tonta, Y. (2015b). The network structure of nanotechnology research output of Turkey: A co-authorship and co-word analysis study. In Salah, A.A. et al. (eds.) Proceedings of ISSI 2015 Istanbul: 15th International Society of Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference, Istanbul, Turkey, 29 June to 4 July, 2015 (pp. 732-743). İstanbul: Boğaziçi University.

Denkbaş, E.B. (2015, January). Nanoteknolojiye yapılacak yatırımlar, ülkelerin ekonomik gücünü yansıtabilecek bir parametre olacak (Investments in nanotechnology will become a parameter reflecting economic powers of countries). Bilişim: Aylık Bilim Kültürü Dergisi, 43(172), 78-87. Retrieved June 6, 2015 from: www.bilisimdergisi.org/pdfindir/s172/pdf/78-87.pdf.

Erkoç, Ş. (2007). Nanobilim ve Nanoteknoloji (Nanoscience and Nanotechnology). Ankara: ODTÜ Geliştirme Vakfı.

Freeman, L.C. (2004). The Development of Social Network Analysis: A Study in the Sociology of Science. Vancouver: Empirical Press.

Günay, D. & Günay, A. (2011, April). 1933’den günümüze Türk yükseköğretiminde niceliksel gelişmeler (Quantitative developments in Turkish higher education since 1933). Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 1(1): 1-22. DOI: 10.5961/jhes.2011.001. Retrieved, December 1, 2015, from http://higheredu-sci.beun.edu.tr/pdf/pdf_HIG_1517.pdf.

Hou, H., Kretschmer. H., & Liu. Z. (2008). The structure of scientific collaboration networks in scientometrics. Scientometrics, 75(2), 192-201.

Kostoff, R.N., Koytcheff, R.G., & Lau, C.G.Y. (2007). Global nanotechnology research literature overview. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 74, 1733-1747.

Kostoff, R.N., Stump, J.A., Johnson, D., Murday, J.S., Lau, C.G.Y., & Tolls, W.M. (2006). The structure and infrastructure of global nanotechnology literature. Journal of Nanoparticles Research, 8, 301-321.

Landauer, T.K., Foltz, P.W., & Laham, D. (1998). Introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes, 25, 259-284.

Leydesdorff, L., & Welbers, K. (2011). The semantic mapping of words and co-words in contexts. Journal of Informetrics, 5(3), 469-475.

Mali, F., Kronegger, L., Doreian, P., & Ferligoj, A. (2012). Dynamic scientific co-authorship networks. In Scharnhorst, A., Börner, K. & Van den Besselaar, P. (eds.). Models of Science Dynamics– Encounters between Complexity Theory and Information Sciences (pp. 195-232). Berlin: Springer.

Martin, T., Ball, B., Karrer, B., Newman M.E.J. (2013). Coauthorship and citation in scientific publishing. Retrieved December 27, 2014 from http://arxiv.org/abs/1304.0473.

Milgram, S. (1967). The small world problem. Psychology Today, 1(1), 61–67.

Milojević, S. (2009). Big science, nano science? Mapping the evolution and socio-cognitive structure of nanoscience/nanotechnology using mixed methods. Unpublished PhD Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.

Milojević, S. (2012). Multidisciplinary cognitive content of nanoscience and nanotechnology. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 14(1), 1-28.

Moody, J. (2004). The structure of a social science collaboration network: Disciplinary cohesion from 1963 to 1999. American Sociological Review, 69(2), 213-238.

Nanobilim ve Nanoteknoloji Stratejileri (Nanoscience and Nanotechnology Strategies). (2004, August). Ankara: TÜBİTAK. Retrieved, December 2, 2015, from http://www.nanoturk.com/raporlar/vizyon2023_nano.pdf.

Nanotechnology. (2015). Retrieved, January 20, 2015, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrality.

Newman, M.E.J. (2001, January 16). The structure of scientific collaboration networks. PNAS, 98(2), 404–409.

Otte, E., & Rousseau, R. (2002). Social Network Analysis: A powerful strategy, also for the information sciences. Journal of Information Science, 28(6), 443–455.

Ovalle-Perandones, M-A., Gorraiz, J., Wieland, M., Gumpenberger, C., & Olmeda-Gomez, G. (2013). The influence of European Framework Programmes on scientific collaboration in nanotechnology. Scientometrics, 97(1), 59-74.

Özel, B. (2010). Scientific collaboration networks: Knowledge diffusion and fragmentation in Turkish management academia. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Bilgi University, Istanbul.

Özgüz, V. (2013). Nanotechnology research and education in Turkey (presentation slides). Retrieved, December 27, 2014, from: ttp://rp7.ffg.at/upload/medialibrary/12_Oezguez.pdf

Page, L., & Brin, S. (1998). The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual web search engine. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 30, 107-117.

Persson, O., Danell, R., & Wiborg Schneider, J. (2009). How to use Bibexcel for various types of bibliometric analysis. In F. Åström, R. Danell, B. Larsen, & J. Schneider (eds.). Celebrating Scholarly Communication Studies: A Festschrift for Olle Persson at his 60th Birthday (pp. 9-24). Leuven, Belgium: International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics.

Rogers, E.M. (1962). Diffusion of Innovations. 1st ed., New York: Free Press of Glencoe.

Rogers, E.M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations. 5th ed., New York: The Free Press.

Rousseau, R. (1997). Sitations: an exploratory study. Cybermetrics. Retrieved, February 14 2014, from http://cybermetrics.cindoc.csic.es/articles/v4i1p4.pdf.

Scharnhorst, A., & Garfield, E. (2010). Tracing scientific influence. Dynamics of Socio-Economic Systems, 2(1), 1-33.

Schummer, J. (2004). Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology. Scientometrics, 59, 425-465

Scott, J. (2000). Social Network Analysis: A Handbook. 2nd ed. London: Sage.

Sonnenwald, D.H. (2007). Scientific collaboration. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 41, 643-681.

Testa, J. (2004). The Thomson Scientific journal selection process. Retrieved, November 25 2015 from http://scientific.thomson.com/free/essays/selectionofmaterial/journalselection/

Ulusal Bilim ve Teknoloji Politikaları 2003-2023 Strateji Belgesi (National Science and Technology Policies The Strategi Document of 2003-2023 (2004). Ankara: TÜBİTAK. Retrieved, December 2, 2015, from http://www.tubitak.gov.tr/tubitak_content_files/vizyon2023/Vizyon2023_Strateji_Belgesi.pdf.

Van Eck, N.J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84, 523–538.

Vitanov, N.K. & Ausloos, M.R. (2012). Knowledge epidemics and population dynamics models for describing idea diffusion. In Scharnhorst, A., Börner, K. & Van den Besselaar, P. (eds.). Models of Science Dynamics – Encounters between Complexity Theory and Information Sciences (pp. 69-125). Berlin: Springer.

Watts, D. (2003). Six Degrees: The Science of a Connected Age. New York: Norton & Co.

White, H.D., & McCain, K.W. (1998). Visualizing a discipline: An author co-citation analysis of information science, 1972–1995. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49, 327-355.


Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item