Evolución y alcance multidisciplinar de tres técnicas de análisis bibliométrico

Carrillo-Calvet, Humberto, Vega-Almeida, Rosa Lidia and Arencibia-Jorge, Ricardo Evolución y alcance multidisciplinar de tres técnicas de análisis bibliométrico. Palabra Clave (La Plata), 2020, vol. 10, n. 1, pp. 1-16. [Journal article (Paginated)]

[thumbnail of 12813] Text
12813 - Published version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial.
Download (5kB)
Alternative locations: https://doi.org/10.24215/18539912e102

English abstract

Objective: the current study aims to analyze the behavior of scientific production on three bibliometric analysis techniques: co-citation, bibliographic coupling, and terms co-occurrence. Methodology: the Web of Science is used as data source. Productivity and impact measures are used to characterize the behavior of each technique practices. Two new indices to determine the multidisciplinary scope of research are proposed, which are complemented by documentary analysis to interpret the results and establish the reference frameworks. Results: the leading authors, institutions and countries are identified, as well as the number of serial publications where the research was disseminated, and the Web of Science subject categories where they are classified. The growing evolution of the literature that uses these techniques for the representation and analysis of knowledge domains was evidenced. The technological domains predominated in the thematic production core, although in the thematic citations core there was also the presence of biomedical, economic and social environments. Conclusions: the existence of a highly productive core of institutions and countries evidences the sustained, intensive and extensive use of these techniques, given the global community recognition of their importance and validity. The proposed indicators allowed to identify the multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary nature of the scientific production related to these analytical techniques. In this way, the influence of metrics and their techniques is made visible, which transcend the limits of the knowledge domain that originated them, from theoretical and meta-theoretical proposals through multiple disciplinary spaces.

Spanish abstract

Objetivo: el presente estudio tiene como objetivo analizar el comportamiento de la producción científica sobre tres técnicas deanálisis bibliométrico: la co-citación, el acoplamiento bibliográfico y la co-ocurrencia de términos. Metodología: se utiliza Webof Science como fuente de datos. Se emplean medidas de productividad e impacto para caracterizar el comportamiento de laaplicación de cada técnica. Se proponen dos nuevos índices para determinar el alcance multidisciplinar de las investigaciones, y se complementan con el análisis documental para interpretar los resultados y establecer los marcos referenciales. Resultados: se identifican los autores, instituciones y países líderes, así como la cantidad de publicaciones seriadas donde se difunden las investigaciones, y las categorías temáticas del Web of Science donde éstas están clasificadas. Se evidenció la creciente evolución de la literatura que utiliza estas técnicas para la representación y análisis de dominios del conocimiento. Los dominios tecnológicos predominaron en los núcleos temáticos de producción, aunque en los núcleos temáticos de citación también hubo presencia de los entornos biomédicos, económicos y sociales. Conclusiones: la existencia de un núcleo altamente productivo de instituciones y países evidencia la sostenida aplicación intensiva y extensiva de estas técnicas, ante el reconocimiento comunitario mundial de su importancia y validez. Los indicadores propuestos permitieron identificar el carácter multidisciplinar y la naturaleza interdisciplinar de la producción científica relacionada con estas técnicas analíticas. Además, se visibiliza la influencia de las metrías y sus técnicas al trascender los límites del dominio de conocimiento que las originó, desde propuestas teóricas y meta-teóricas hacia múltiples espacios disciplinarios.

Item type: Journal article (Paginated)
Keywords: Bibliometrics, Co-citation analysis, Bibliographic coupling, Co-word analysis, Multidisciplinarity, Bibliometría, Análisis de co-citación, Acoplamiento bibliográfico, Análisis de co-palabras, Multidisciplinariedad
Subjects: B. Information use and sociology of information
B. Information use and sociology of information > BA. Use and impact of information.
B. Information use and sociology of information > BB. Bibliometric methods
Depositing user: Palabra Clave
Date deposited: 12 Nov 2020 00:44
Last modified: 12 Nov 2020 00:44
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/40609

References

Åström, F. (2007). Changes in the LIS research front: Time‐sliced cocitation analyses of LIS journal articles, 1990–2004. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(7), 947-957.

Boyack, K. W., Börner, K. y Klavans, R. (2009). Mapping the structure and evolution of chemistry research.Scientometrics, 79(1), 45-60.

Boyack, K. W. y Klavans, R. (2010). Co-citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, and direct citation: Which citationapproach represents the research front most accurately? Journal of the American Society for Information Scienceand Technology, 61(12), 2389-2404.

Boyack, K. W., Klavans, R. y Börner, K. (2005). Mapping the backbone of science. Scientometrics, 64(3), 351-374.

Bullinaria, J. A. y Levy, J. P. (2007). Extracting semantic representations from word co-occurrence statistics: Acomputational study. Behavior research methods, 39(3), 510-526.

Bullinaria, J. A. y Levy, J. P. (2012). Extracting semantic representations from word co-occurrence statistics: stop-lists, stemming, and SVD. Behavior research methods, 44(3), 890-907.

Callon, M., Courtial, J. P., Turner, W. A. y Bauin, S. (1983). From translation to network-e co-word analysis. Socialscience information, 22(2), 191-235.

Chalavarias, D. y Cointet, J. P. (2008). Bottom-up scientific field detection for dynamical and hierarchical sciencemapping, methodology and case study. Scientometrics, 75(1), 37-50.

Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E. y Herrera, F. (2011). An approach for detecting, quantifying,and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the fuzzy sets theory field. Journal ofinformetrics, 5(1), 146-166.

Cobo, M. J., Martínez, M. Á., Gutiérrez-Salcedo, M., Fujita, H. y Herrera-Viedma, E. (2015). 25 years at knowledge-based systems: a bibliometric analysis. Knowledge-based systems, 80, 3-13.

De Bellis, N. (2009). Bibliometrics and citation analysis. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.Eom, S. (2008). All author cocitation analysis and first author cocitation analysis: a comparative empirical analysis.Journal of informetrics, 2(1), 53-64.

Glänzel, W. (2012). Bibliometric methods for detecting and analysing emerging research topics. El profesional de lainformación, 21(1), 194-201.

Hjorland, B. (2002). Domain analysis in Information Science: Eleven approaches traditional as well as innovative.Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 58(4), 422-462.

Katsurai, M. y Ono, S. (2019). TrendNets: mapping emerging research trends from dynamic co-word networks viasparse representation. Scientometrics, 121(3), 1583-1598.

Kessler, M. M. (1963). Bibliographic coupling extended in time: ten case histories. Information storage and retrieval,1(4), 169-187.

Latour, B. (2011). Networks, societies, spheres: reflections of an actor-network theorist. International journal ofcommunication, 5, 796-810.

Leydesdorff, L. y Rafols, I. (2011). Indicators of the interdisciplinarity of journals: Diversity, centrality, and citations.Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 87-100.

Leydesdorff, L. y Welbers, K. (2011). e semantic mapping of words and co-words in contexts. Journal of informetrics,5(3), 469-475.

Liu, X., Zhang, L. y Hong, S. (2011). Global biodiversity research during 1900–2009: a bibliometric analysis. Biodiversity and conservation, 20(4), 807-826.

MacRoberts, M. H. y MacRoberts, B. R. (2018). e mismeasure of science: Citation analysis. Journal of the Associationfor Information Science and Technology, 69(3), 474-482.

Marshakova, I. V. (1973). A system of document connection based on references. Scientific and technical informationserial of VINITI, 6(2), 3-8.

McCain, K. W. (1991). Mapping economics through the journal literature: An experiment in journal cocitationanalysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(4), 290.

McCain, K. W. y Whitney, P. J. (1994). Contrasting assessments of interdisciplinarity in emerging specialties: ecase of neural networks research. Knowledge, 15(3), 285-306.

Meyer-Brötz, F., Stelzer, B., Schiebel, E. y Brecht, L. (2018). Mapping the technology and innovation managementliterature using hybrid bibliometric networks. International Journal of Technology Management, 77(4), 235-286.

Milojević, S., Sugimoto, C. R., Yan, E. y Ding, Y. (2011). e cognitive structure of library and information science:Analysis of article title words. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(10),1933-1953.

Morris, S. A. (2005). Manifestation of emerging specialties in journal literature: A growth model of papers, references,exemplars, bibliographic coupling, cocitation, and clustering coefficient distribution. Journal of the AmericanSociety for Information Science and Technology, 56(12), 1250-1273.

Moya-Anegón, F., Vargas-Quesada, B., Herrero-Solana, V., Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Corera-Álvarez, E. y Muñoz-Fernández, F. J. (2004). A new technique for building maps of large scientific domains based on the cocitationof classes and categories. Scientometrics, 61(1), 129-145.

Nicolaisen, J. (2007). Citation analysis. Annual review of information science and technology, 41(1), 609-641.

Olmeda-Gómez, C., Ovalle-Perandones, M. A. y Perianes-Rodríguez, A. (2017). Co-word analysis and thematiclandscapes in Spanish information science literature, 1985–2014. Scientometrics, 113(1), 195-217.

Persson, O. (1994). e intellectual base and research fronts of JASIS 1986–1990. Journal of the American society forinformation science, 45(1), 31-38.

Persson, O. (2001). All author citations versus first author citations. Scientometrics, 50(2), 339-344.Rip, A. y Courtial, J. (1984). Co-word maps of biotechnology: an example of cognitive scientometrics. Scientometrics,6(6), 381-400.

Shiau, W. L., Dwivedi, Y. K. y Yang, H. S. (2017). Co-citation and cluster analyses of extant literature on socialnetworks. International Journal of Information Management, 37(5), 390-399.

Seale, C., Charteris-Black, J., MacFarlane, A. y McPherson, A. (2010). Interviews and internet forums: a comparisonof two sources of qualitative data. Qualitative health research, 20(5), 595-606.

Seale, C., Ziebland, S. y Charteris-Black, J. (2006). Gender, cancer experience and internet use: a comparative keywordanalysis of interviews and online cancer support groups. Social science & medicine, 62(10), 2577-2590.

Small, H. (1973). Co‐citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents.Journal of the American Society for information Science, 24(4), 265-269.

Small, H. (2003). Paradigms, citations, and maps of science: A personal history. Journal of the American Society forInformation Science and Technology, 54(5), 394-399.

Song, J., Zhang, H. y Dong, W. (2016). A review of emerging trends in global PPP research: analysis and visualization.Scientometrics, 107(3), 1111-1147.

Tang, O. y Musa, S. N. (2011). Identifying risk issues and research advancements in supply chain risk management.International Journal of production economics, 133(1), 25-34.

ijs, B., Schiebel, E. y Glänzel, W. (2013). Do second-order similarities provide added-value in a hybrid approach?Scientometrics, 96(3), 667-677.

Tian, Y., Wen, C. y Hong, S. (2008). Global scientific production on GIS research by bibliometric analysis from 1997to 2006. Journal of informetrics, 2(1), 65-74.

Vega-Almeida, R. L. (2010). Ciencia de la información y paradigma social: enfoque histórico, epistemológico y bibliométrico para un análisis de dominio (Tesis doctoral). Universidad de Granada, Granada. Recuperado dehttps://digibug.ugr.es/handle/10481/15418

Wang, H., He, Q., Liu, X., Zhuang, Y. y Hong, S. (2012). Global urbanization research from 1991 to 2009: a systematicresearch review. Landscape and urban planning, 104(3-4), 299-309.

Wang, X., Cheng, Q. y Lu, W. (2014). Analyzing evolution of research topics with NEViewer: a new method basedon dynamic co-word networks. Scientometrics, 101(2), 1253-1271.

White, H. D. y Griffith B. C. (1981). Author co-citation: A literature measure of intellectual structure. Journal ofAmerican Society for Information Science, 32(3), 163-172.

White, H. D. y McCain, K. (1998). Visualizing a discipline: An author co-citation analysis of Information Science,1972-1995. Journal of the American Society for information Science, 49(4), 327-355.

Yang, S., Han, R., Wolfram, D. y Zhao, Y. (2016). Visualizing the intellectual structure of information science (2006–2015): introducing author keyword coupling analysis. Journal of informetrics, 10(1), 132-150.

Zhang, Q. R., Li, Y., Liu, J. S., Chen, Y. D. y Chai, L. H. (2017). A dynamic co-word network-related approach on theevolution of China’s urbanization research. Scientometrics, 111(3), 1623-1642.

Zhao, D., y Strotmann, A. (2008a). Evolution of research activities and intellectual influences in Informa-tion Science1996-2005: Introducing author bibliographic coupling analysis. Journal of the American Society for InformationScience and Technology, 59(13), 2070-2086.

Zhao, D. y Strotmann, A. (2008b). Comparing all-author and first-author co-citation analyses of Information Science.Journal of informetrics, 2(3), 229-239.

Zhao, D. y Strotmann, A. (2015). Analysis and visualization of citation networks. Synthesis lectures on informationconcepts, retrieval, and services, 7(1), 1-207.

Zhao, D. y Strotmann, A. (2020). Telescopic and panoramic views of library and information science research 2011–2018: a comparison of four weighting schemes for author co-citation analysis. Scientometrics, 124(1), 255-270.

Zhuang, Y., Liu, X., Nguyen, T., He, Q. y Hong, S. (2013). Global remote sensing research trends during 1991–2010:a bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 96(1), 203-219.


Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item
Contact us
Send email Sponsors
Sponsor: AIMS Sponsor: D&P Sponsor: UniNa CAB Get connected
Facebook Facebook Twitter Twitter Linkedin LinkedIn RSS RSS