Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Co-word analysis and thematic landscapes in Spanish information science literature, 1985–2014

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper discusses the thematic backdrop for Spanish library and information science output. It draws from Web of Science records on papers authored by researchers at Spanish institutions and published under the category ‘Information Science & Library Science’ between 1985 and 2014. Two analytical techniques were used, one based on co-keyword and the other on document co-citation networks. Burst detection was applied to noun phrases and references of the intellectual base. Co-citation analysis identified nine research fronts: ‘digital rights management’, ‘citation analysis’, ‘translation services’, ‘bibliometric analysis’, ‘co-authorship’, ‘electronic books’, ‘webometrics’, ‘information systems’ and ‘world wide web’. The most recent trends in the subject areas addressed in Spain were found to lie in metrics-related sub-specialities: the h-index, scientific collaboration, journal bibliometric indicators, rankings, universities and webometrics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abadal, E., & Guallar, J. (2010). Prensa digital y bibliotecas. Gijon: Trea.

  • Aguillo, I. (2010). Measuring the institution’s footprint in the web. Library Hi Tech, 27(4), 540–556.

  • Albarrán, P., Crespo, J. A., Ortuño, I., & Ruiz-Castillo, J. (2011). The skewness of science in 219 sub-fields and a number of aggregates. Scientometrics, 88(2), 385–397.

  • Ardanuy, J. (2012). Scientific collaboration in library and information science viewed through the web of knowledge: The Spanish case. Scientometrics, 90(3), 877–890.

  • Arquero Aviles, R. (2001). Análisis de la investigación Española en Biblioteconomía y Documentación: 1975–1984 (Tesis doctoral, Universidad Complutense) http://biblioteca.ucm.es/tesis/inf/ucm-t25424.pdf Accessed 20 May 2017.

  • Blázquez-Ruiz, J., Guerrero-Bote, V. P., & Moya-Anegón, F. (2016). New scientometric-based knowledge map of food science research (2003–2014). Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 15(6), 1040–1055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bordons, M., Sancho, R., Morillo, F., & Gómez, I. (2010). Scientific activity profile of Spanish universities in four thematic areas: A multifactor analysis. Revista Espanola de Documentacion Cientifica, 33(1), 9–33.

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callon, M., Courtial, J. P., & Laville, F. (1991). Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: the case of polymer chemistry. Scientometrics, 22(1), 155–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cano, V. (1999). Bibliometric overview of library and information science research in Spain. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(8), 675–690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. (2004). Searching for intellectual turning points: Progressive knowledge domain visualization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101(suppl. 1), 5303–5310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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(3), 359–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C., Ibekwe-SanJuan, F., & Hou, J. (2010). The structure and dynamics of cocitation clusters: A multiple-perspective cocitation analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(7), 1386–1409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C., Dubin, R., & Kim, M. C. (2014). Emerging trends and new developments in regenerative medicine: A scientometric update (2000–2014). Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy, 14(9), 1295–1317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, R., & Young, J. (2013). The interdisciplinary structure of research on intercultural relations: A co-citation network analysis study. Scientometrics, 96(1), 147–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, J. (2014). Intellectual structure of the institutional repository field: A co-word analysis. Journal of Information Science, 40(3), 386–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ding, W., & Chen, C. (2014). Dynamic topic detection and tracking: A comparison of HDP, C-word, and cocitation methods. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 65(10), 2084–2097.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ding, Y., Chowdhury, G. G., & Foo, S. (2000). Journal as markers of intellectual space: Journal co-citation analysis of information retrieval area, 1987–1997. Scientometrics, 47(1), 55–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunning, T. (1993). Accurate methods for the statistics of surprise and coincidence. Computational Linguistics, 19(1), 61–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, L. C. (1977). A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness. Sociometry, 40(1), 35–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García-Lillo, F., Úbeda-García, M., & Marco-Lajara, M. (2016). Organizationl ambidexterity: Exploring the knowledge base. Scientometrics, 107(3), 1021–1040.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E., Malin, M. V., & Small, H. (1978). Citation data as science indicators. In Y. Elkana et al. (Eds.), Toward a metric of science: The advent of science indicators (pp. 179–208). New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gmür, M. (2003). Co-citation analysis and the search for invisible colleges: A methodological evaluation. Scientometrics, 57(1), 27–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • González-Alcaide, G., Calafat, A., Becoña, E., Thijs, B., & Glänzel, W. (2016). Co-citation analysis of articles published in substance abuse journals: Intellectual structure and research fields (2001–2012). Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 77(5), 710–722.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guallar, J., & Abadal, E. (2009). Evaluación de hemerotecas de prensa digital: Indicadores y ejemplos de buenas prácticas. Profesional de la Informacion, 18(3), 255–269.

  • Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569–16572.

  • Hu, J., & Zhang, Y. (2015). Research patterns and trends of recommendation system in China using co-word analysis. Information Processing and Management, 51(4), 329–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiménez-Contreras, E. (2002). La aportación española a la producción científica internacional en biblioteconomía y documentación: balance de diez años (1992–2001). BiD, 9 http://bid.ub.edu/09jimen2.htm. Accessed 11 January 2017.

  • Kamada, T., & Kawai, S. (1989). An algorithm for drawing general undirected graphs. Information Processing Letters, 31(1), 7–15.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, M. C., & Chen, C. (2015). A scientometric review of emerging trends and new developments in recommendation systems. Scientometrics, 104(1), 239–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleinberg, J. (2002). Bursty and hierarchical structure in streams. In Proceedings of the eighth ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining (pp. 91–101). NewYork, NY: ACM Press.

  • Lariviere, V., Sugimoto, C. S., & Cronin, B. (2012). A bibliometric chronicling of library and information science’s first hundred years. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(5), 997–1016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L. (2008). On the normalization and visualization of author co-citation data: Salton’s cosine versus the Jaccard index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(1), 77–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, P., Chen, B.-L., Liu, K., & Xie, H. (2016). Magnetic nanoparticles research: A scientometric analysis of development trends and research fronts. Scientometrics, 108(3), 1591–1602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Ch., & Gui, Q. (2016). Mapping intellectual structures and dynamics of transport geography research: A scientometrics overview from 1982 to 2014. Scientometrics, 109(1), 159–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, L., & Mei, S. (2016). Document visualizing the GVC research: A co-occurrence network based bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 109(2), 953–977.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • López-Herrera, A. G., Cobo, M. J., Herrera-Viedma, E., Herrera, F., Bailón-Moreno, R., Jiménez-Contreras, E. (2009). Visualization and evolution of the scientific structure of fuzzy sets research in Spain. Information Research, 14(4) http://www.informationr.net/ir/14-4/paper421.html. Accessed 11 January 2017.

  • Luxburg, U. V. (2007). A tutorial on spectral clustering. Statistics and Computing, 17(4), 395–416.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Maybee, C. (2006). Undergraduate perceptions of information use: The basis for creating user-centered student information literacy instruction. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 32(1), 79–85.

  • Moed, H. F. (2010). Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 265–277.

  • Moneda-Corrochano, M. de la. (2016). Las cifras de la enseñanza universitaria en documentación en España: 2014. Anuario ThinkEPI, 1, 29–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moya-Anegón, F. de, Jiménez-Contreras, E., & Moneda Corrochano, M. de la. (1998). Research fronts in library and information science in Spain (1985–1994). Scientometrics, 42(2), 229–246. 

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muñoz-Leiva, F., Viedma-del-Jesús, M. I., Sánchez-Fernández, J., & López-Herrera, A. G. (2012). An application of co-word analysis and bibliometric maps for detecting the most highlighting themes in the consumer behaviour research from a longitudinal perspective. Quality & Quantity, 46(4), 1077–1095.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newman, M. E. J. (2006). Modularity and community structure in networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103(23), 8577–8582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olmeda-Gómez, C., & Moya-Anegón, F. de. (2016). Publishing trends in library and information sciences across European countries and institutions. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 42(6), 27–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Persson, O. (1994). The intellectual base and research fronts of JASIS 1986–1990. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45(1), 31–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plaza, L. M. (2014). La información y documentación científica en el CSIC. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 37(2), e048.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radicchi, F., Fortunato, S., & Castellano, C. (2008). Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105(45), 17268–17272.

  • Ranganathan, C., & Ganapathy, S. (2002). Key dimensions of business-to-consumer web sites. Information and Management, 39(6), 457–465.

  • Ravikumar, S., Agrahari, A., & Singh, S. N. (2015). Document mapping the intellectual structure of scientometrics: A co-word analysis of the journal scientometrics (2005–2010). Scientometrics, 102(1), 929–955.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rip, A., & Courtial, J. P. (1984). Co-words of biotechnology: An example of cognitive scientometrics. Scientometrics, 6(6), 381–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, R., & Zuccala, A. (2004). A classification of author co-citations: Definitions and search strategies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55(6), 513–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseeuw, P. J. (1987). Silhouettes: A graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 20, 53–65.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Salton, G., & McGill, M. J. (1986). Introduction to modern information retrieval. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, J. W. (2006). Concept symbols revisited: Naming clusters by parsing and filtering of noun phrases from citation contexts of concept symbols. Scientometrics, 68(3), 573–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schvaneveldt, R. W. (Ed.). (1990). Pathfinder associative networks: Studies in knowledge organization. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Sedighi, M. (2016). Application of word co-occurrence analysis method in mapping of the scientific fields (case study: The field of informetrics). Library Review, 65(1/2), 52–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shafique, M. (2013). Thinking inside the box? Intellectual structure of the knowledge base of innovation research (1988–2008). Strategic Management Journal, 34(1), 62–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shiau, W.-L. (2016). The intellectual core of enterprise information systems: A co-citation analysis. Enterprise Information Systems, 10(8), 815–844.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shibata, N., Kajikawa, Y., Taked, Y., & Matsushima, K. (2008). Detecting emerging research fronts based on topological measures in citation networks of scientific publications. Technovation, 28(11), 758–775.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shiffrin, R. M., & Börner, K. (2004). Mapping knowledge domains. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101(suppl. 1), 5183–5185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Small, H. (1980). Co-citation context analysis and the structure of paradigms. Journal of Documentation, 36(3), 183–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Small, H. (2003). Paradigms, citations, and maps of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(5), 394–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Small, H., & Griffith, B. C. (1974). The structure of scientific literatures I: Identifying and graphing specialties. Science Studies, 4(1), 17–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Subramaniam, M., & Youndt, M. A. (2005). The influence of intellectual capital on the types of innovative capabilities. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3), 450–463.

  • Thelwall, M., & Sud, P. (2011). A comparison of methods for collecting web citation data for academic organizations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(8), 1488–1497.

  • Topalli, M., & Ivanaj, S. (2016). Mapping the evolution of the impact of economic transition on Central and Eastern European enterprises: A co-word analysis. Journal of World Business, 51(5), 744–759.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walters, W. H., & Wilder, E. I. (2016). Disciplinary, national, and departamental contributions to the literature of library and information science, 2007–2012. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(6), 1487–1506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Z., Zhao, H., & Wang, Y. (2015). Social networks in marketing research 2001–2014: A co-word analysis. Scientometrics, 105(1), 65–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, R. (2000). The intellectual and social organization of the sciences. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yan, B.-N., Lee, T.-S., & Lee, T.-P. (2015). Mapping the intellectual structure of the Internet of Things (IoT) field (2000–2014): A co-word analysis. Scientometrics, 105(2), 1285–1300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, K.-C. (2016). Intellectual structure of trust in business and management: A co-citation analysis. Electronic Library, 34(3), 358–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2008). 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2014). The knowledge base and research front of information science 2006–2010: An author co-citation and bibliographic coupling analysis. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(5), 996–1006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zitt, M., & Small, H. (2008). Modifying the journal impact factor by fractional citation weighting: The audience factor. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(11), 1856–1860.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the insightful comments and suggestions provided by anonymous reviewers. The authors wish to thank Margaret Clark, translator, for her linguistic support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Library & Information Science, Carlos III University, Madrid, Spain

    Carlos Olmeda-Gómez, Maria-Antonia Ovalle-Perandones & Antonio Perianes-Rodríguez

Authors
  1. Carlos Olmeda-Gómez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria-Antonia Ovalle-Perandones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Antonio Perianes-Rodríguez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carlos Olmeda-Gómez.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Olmeda-Gómez, C., Ovalle-Perandones, MA. & Perianes-Rodríguez, A. Co-word analysis and thematic landscapes in Spanish information science literature, 1985–2014. Scientometrics 113, 195–217 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2486-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2486-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation