A comparative study of first and all-author bibliographic coupling analysis based on Scientometrics
Tóm tắt
This paper takes 2,876 papers published in Scientometrics as the sample, and the time span of these papers is nearly ten years. We have studied the intellectual structure and development trend of Scientometrics in two periods within five years, and made an empirical exploration and comparison of two methods of author bibliographic coupling methods—first author bibliographic coupling (FABCA) and all authors bibliographic coupling (AABCA). The results show that the intellectual structure of Scientometrics in the two periods are relatively stable, but the intellectual structure of the latter period is clearer, and the correlation and integration of the research topics is stronger than that of the previous period. There is a strong correlation between AABCA and FABCA, but each has its own characteristics, and there are subtle differences between them. The similarity between them can be found by authors rank correlation analysis, the cosine similarity analysis, and discipline research topic detection. However, the factor models fitting analysis, research topics detection and evolution show that there are differences between them. AABCA is sensitive to the discovery of research hotspots, and can detect more research topics than FABCA. While FABCA has advantages over AABCA in reflecting the frontier and innovation of the discipline. It can provide more information. Therefore, FABCA and AABCA have their own characteristics and cannot be replaced. The combination of the two methods is a powerful and effective research method to explore the intellectual structure and evolution trend of the discipline.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Acedo, F. J., & Casillas, J. C. (2005). Current paradigms in the international management field: An author co-citation analysis. International Business Review, 14(5), 619–639.
Amudha, S. S., & Sevukan, R. (2019). Application of author bibliographic coupling analysis and author keywords ranking in identifying research fronts of Indian Neurosciences research. Library Philosophy and Practice, 24(3), 1–11.
Bassecoulard, E., Lelu, A., & Zitt, M. (2007). Mapping nanosciences by citation flows: A preliminary analysis. Scientometrics, 70(3), 859–880.
Boyack, K. W., & Klavans, R. (2010). Co-citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, and direct citation: Which citation approach represents the research front most accurately? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(12), 2389–2404.
Chang, Y. W., Huang, M. H., & Lin, C. W. (2015). Evolution of research subjects in library and information science based on keyword, bibliographical coupling, and co-citation analyses. Scientometrics, 105(3), 2071–2087.
Gazni, A., & Didegah, F. (2016). The relationship between authors’ bibliographic coupling and citation exchange: analyzing disciplinary differences. Scientometrics, 107(2), 609–626.
Glänzel, W., & Czerwon, H. J. (1996). A new methodological approach to bibliographic coupling and its application to the national, regional and institutional level. Scientometrics, 37(2), 195–221.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice hall.
Huang, M. H., & Chang, C. P. (2015). A comparative study on detecting research fronts in the organic light-emitting diode (OLED) field using bibliographic coupling and co-citation. Scientometrics, 102(3), 2041–2057.
Jarneving, B. (2005). A comparison of two bibliometric methods for mapping of the research front. Scientometrics, 65(2), 245–263.
Jeong, Y. K., Song, M., & Ding, Y. (2014). Content-based author co-citation analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 8(1), 197–211.
Kessler, M. M. (1963). Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers. American documentation, 14(1), 10–25.
Kim, H. J., & Cho, H. Y. (2010). A study on intellectual structure using author co-citation analysis and author bibliographic coupling analysis in the field of social welfare science. Journal of the Korean Society for information Management, 27(3), 283–306.
Kuusi, O., & Meyer, M. (2007). Anticipating technological breakthroughs: Using bibliographic coupling to explore the nanotubes paradigm. Scientometrics, 70(3), 759–777.
Li, M., Porter, A. L., & Wang, Z. L. (2017). Evolutionary trend analysis of nanogenerator research based on a novel perspective of phased bibliographic coupling. Nano Energy, 34, 93–102.
Ma, R. (2012). Author bibliographic coupling analysis: A test based on a Chinese academic database. Journal of Informetrics, 6(4), 532–542.
Ma, R. (2015). Research on scientific communication based on author's academic relationship.Science Press.
McCain, K. W. (1990). Mapping authors in intellectual space: A technical overview. Journal of the American society for information science, 41(6), 433–443.
Nerur, S. P., Rasheed, A. A., & Natarajan, V. (2008). The intellectual structure of the strategic management field: An author co-citation analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 29(3), 319–336.
Park, J. Y., & Jeong, D. Y. (2013). A study on the intellectual structure of library and information science in Korea by author bibliographic coupling analysis. Journal of the Korean Society for information Management, 30(4), 31–59.
Rousseau, R. (2010). Bibliographic coupling and co-citation as dual notions. The Janus faced scholar. A Festschrift in honour of Peter Ingwersen, 6(S), 173–183.
Schneider, J., Larsen, B., & Ingwersen, P. (2009). A comparative study of first and all-author co-citation counting, and two different matrix generation approaches applied for author co-citation analyses. Scientometrics, 80(1), 103–130.
White, H. D., & Griffith, B. C. (1981). Author cocitation: A literature measure of intellectual structure. Journal of the American Society for information Science, 32(3), 163–171.
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(4), 327–355.
White, H. D. (2001). Authors as citers over time. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52(2), 87–108.
White, H. D. (2003). Pathfinder networks and author cocitation analysis: A remapping of paradigmatic information scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(5), 423–434.
Yan, E., & Ding, Y. (2012). Scholarly network similarities: How bibliographic coupling networks, citation networks, cocitation networks, topical networks, coauthorship networks, and coword networks relate to each other. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(7), 1313–1326.
Yanhui, S., & Yishan, W. (2014). A comparative study on author bibliographic coupling analysis and author keyword-coupling analysis based on Scientometrics. Journal of Library Science in China, 40(1), 25–38.
Yang, S., Han, R., Wolfram, D., & Zhao, Y. (2016). Visualizing the intellectual structure of information science (2006–2015): Introducing author keyword coupling analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 10(1), 132–150.
Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2008a). Evolution of research activities and intellectual influences in information science 1996–2005: Introducing author bibliographic-coupling analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(13), 2070–2086.
Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2008b). Comparing all-author and first-author co-citation analyses of information science. Journal of Informetrics, 2(3), 229–239.
Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2008c). Information science during the first decade of the web: An enriched author cocitation analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(6), 916–937.
Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2008d). Author bibliographic coupling: Another approach to citation-based author intellectual network analysis. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 45(1), 1–10.
Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2014). The intellectual base and research front of information science 2006–2010: An author cocitation and bibliographic coupling analysis. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(5), 995–1006.