The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/0368-492X.htm

K
49,3 Prosumption: bibliometric
analysis using HistCite and
VOSviewer
1020 Syed Hamad Hassan Shah and Shen Lei
Glorious Sun School of Business and Management, Donghua University,
Received 27 December 2018 Shanghai, China
Revised 29 April 2019
Accepted 28 May 2019
Muhammad Ali
School of Economics and Management, Tongji University, Shanghai, China, and
Dmitrii Doronin and Syed Talib Hussain
Glorious Sun School of Business and Management, Donghua University,
Shanghai, China

Abstract
Purpose – Over the past decade, the term prosumption (denoting simultaneous consumption and
production) has exhibited a dramatic increase in frequency of use in publications in the social sciences and
business studies. This paper aims to explore the current state of research into prosumption, particularly
related to marketing.
Design/methodology/approach – This study systematically reviews papers on prosumption extracted
from the Web of Science, using two bibliometric analyses on 20 years of data: citation counts from HistCite
and bibliographic coupling and cartography analysis from the visualization of similarities software
VOSviewer. A total of 75 papers on prosumption were found from the period 1997-2017, and the most
influential authors, articles, journals, institutions and countries among these were determined. Furthermore,
bibliographic coupling and most co-occurrent keywords in the title, keywords and abstracts were found.
Findings – This study found that the USA and the UK were the most influential among prosumption
publications. Ritzer was the most prominent author and Journal of Consumer Culture was the top-ranking
journal. Three clusters were found using bibliographic coupling and cartography analysis: prosumer and co-
creation, prosumer and user-generated content and prosumer and informational capital.
Research limitations/implications – This analysis provided a basis for conceptualizing publications
on prosumption related to business and sociology in the discipline of marketing. Content analysis found that
prosumption research in marketing is in early stages: little quantitative study has been conducted yet.
Researchers have not yet constructed a quantitative measure for prosumption.
Practical implications – Business firms can engage prosumers to gain market share and competitive
advantage, especially relative to value co-creation, with near-zero marginal cost.
Originality/value – This may be the first bibliometric analysis and systematic review of prosumption
research in marketing studies. The achievements of this paper open new avenues for other prosumption
researchers.
Keywords Web of Science, VOSviewer, Bibliometric review, HistCite, Prosumer
Paper type Research paper

Kybernetes
Vol. 49 No. 3, 2020
pp. 1020-1045
1. Introduction
© Emerald Publishing Limited
0368-492X
Toffler (1980) coined the term prosumption (simultaneous consumption and production), but
DOI 10.1108/K-12-2018-0696 for a long time, there was no explicit discussion of this phenomenon in the academic world,
with the exception of Xie et al. (2008). Then, 30 years later, Ritzer and Jurgenson (2010) Prosumption:
published their seminal paper indicating the explicit emergence of prosumption in the bibliometric
digital world, which brought the attention of other researchers to it. Over the past Eight
years, prosumption has dramatically expanded, due to the internet, Web 2.0, and consumers’
analysis
newfound ease of access to the production side of consumption (manufacturing, design, and
distribution) and the consequent new freedom firms found over consumers (Seran and
Izvercian, 2014; Rayna and Striukova, 2016). Despite the relevance of prosumption to
marketing discipline, whose roots are in business studies and sociology (Seran and
1021
Izvercian, 2014; Dusi, 2018), there have been few works that provide a bibliometric analysis
of prosumption in marketing studies. This study employed bibliometric co-citation analysis
with HistCite to develop an in-depth understanding of prosumption in marketing discipline.
Furthermore, new research streams have been explored through cartography analysis using
the VOSviewer, which has frequently been used in other bibliometric mapping studies
(Vošner et al., 2017; Byington et al., 2019; Sarkodie and Strezov, 2019).
Bibliometric co-citation analysis is a meta-analytical tool that demonstrates
interconnections among research articles and topics (Cote et al., 1991; Kim and McMillan,
2008) by analyzing how often an article is cited by other articles, indicating key research
streams for a topic (Luukkonen, 1997; Nederhof, 2006). It enables researchers and authors to

gain a clear view of the structure of the given field (Zupic and Cater, 2015). HistCite and
VOSviewer software highlight the most-cited articles and provides sketch visualization
graphs of citations (Thelwall, 2008; Garfield, 2009). This study uses both HistCite and
VOSviewer to analyze and conduct a bibliometric analysis that evaluates networks among
highly cited articles.
HistCite is used in both the basic sciences and the social sciences (Christensen and
Gazley, 2008; Fetscherin and Heinrich, 2015; Sun et al., 2019). However, it appears that
HistCite has not been used for prosumption studies previously. HistCite demonstrates and
analyzes citations in articles retrieved from the Web of Science (WoS). The genealogical
antecedents of a research field can be discovered and explored through citation behavior
because more commonly cited publications are highlighted by co-citation analysis
(Fetscherin et al., 2010). This study also investigated which journals, articles, and countries
contributed most to prosumption research. In addition to HistCite, the bibliographic
coupling and cartographic analysis provided by VOSviewer were also used. As a result,
frequently occurring keywords were identified in prosumption research streams.
Using co-citation bibliometric analysis, bibliographic coupling, cartography analysis,
and last but not least content analysis of the literature, this study explores answers to the
following research questions:

RQ1. Which channels (authors, articles, journals, institutions and countries) are the
most influential in prosumption research?
RQ2. How are prosumption articles clustered, and which research streams are likely to
emerge in marketing studies?
RQ3. Which research streams related to prosumption have received the most attention?
RQ4. What guidelines for future research can be derived that will open new avenues for
researchers in marketing studies?
The rest of the article includes a brief summary of the historical evolution and prominence of
prosumption in the digital arena and the emergence of HistCite and VOSviewer. The
research methods used, including co-citation analysis with HistCite and bibliographic
K coupling and cartography analysis with VOSviewer, are then introduced. The results are
49,3 given in tabular form and in visual representations that show emerging research clusters,
produced by VOSviewer. Following this, relevant insights are presented in the discussion
part, and the paper is concluded with limitations of the study and recommendations for
future research.

1022 2. Theoretical background

2.1 Emergence of prosumption
The term prosumption was initially coined by Allan Toffler in early 1980s (Kotler, 2010).
The concept of prosumption has been discussed by eminent research scholars in consumer
studies (Brodie et al., 2013; Czuba, 2017; Samuel et al., 2018) and socio-economic studies
(Cova and Dalli, 2009; Ritzer and Jurgenson, 2010; Bellekom et al., 2016; Ma et al., 2019).
Beginning in the early 2000s, numerous concepts have been explored in different areas of
marketing research that investigated contemporary and emerging shifts in classic
production paradigms. Some scholars have defined prosumers as co-creators who
cooperated with firms, and this phenomenon was called value co-creation (Prahalad and
Ramaswamy, 2004). Others explored the idea of the working consumer (Cova and Dalli,
2009), treating them as active players in value creation, primarily in social relationships and
immaterial labor. Campbell (2005) developed the concept of craft consumption to describe
consumer design and production of products, along with use (Campbell, 2005). Watson and
Shove (2008) used the term do-it-yourself to express those practices in which consumers act
simultaneously as builders, designers, inspectors, and evaluators of what they produce and
then consume in their own personal use (Watson and Shove, 2008; Wolf and McQuitty,
2011). Leadbeater and Miller (2004) used the expression pro-am (professional amateur),
which describes individuals who pursue their projects and activities as amateurs but set
professional standards (Leadbeater and Miller, 2004).
Early studies indicated that the prosumer was someone who produced and consumed
goods and services for their own use, such as cooking a meal at home. However, with the
passage of time, a new conceptualization of prosumer has emerged: prosumers are those
who create value for everyone in their community (not just for themselves) and share it
globally (Tapscott and Williams, 2006). Thus, prosumers are knowledgeable, empowered
consumers who use digital technology (Web 2.0) to collaborate and participate in product or
service design, conception, testing, and usage, and they have a significant influence on their
social networks and communities (Seran and Izvercian, 2014).

2.2 Emergence of HistCite and VOSviewer

HistCite is a robust quantitative method for analyzing systematic literature reviews (Zupic

and Cater, 2015). Pan et al. (2018) investigated 481 research articles that use HistCite and
VOSviewer for bibliometric mapping. They found a significant upward trend in the use of
these tools, but VOSviewer was in their sample used more frequently than HistCite (Pan
et al., 2018). Apriliyanti and Alon (2017) used HistCite as a bibliometric co-citation tool for
336 articles and VOSviewer software as bibliometric cartography tool for 2088 articles to
isolate five research streams for absorptive capacity (Apriliyanti and Alon, 2017).
VOSviewer is widely used in bibliometric analysis, especially in thematic analysis,
cartography, and cluster analysis (Yuan et al., 2017; Kokol et al., 2018; Llanos-Herrera and
Merigo, 2019). Olczyk (2016) used HistCite and VOSviewer to identify growth patterns in the
literature on international competitiveness, with the help of bibliometric citation data (1945-2015)
extracted from the WoS (Olczyk, 2016). The results indicated that international competitiveness
theory originates from models of competition, not from neoclassical theories of international
trade, and competitiveness is mostly measured in term of trade/export performance. Thus, Prosumption:
bibliometric analysis can help researchers to identify the origins and the current significance of a bibliometric
given concept (Fellnhofer, 2019). Examination of the literature shows that both HistCite and
VOSviewer are extensively used. Therefore, this study uses both in its analysis.
analysis
HistCite is used to conduct a bibliometric analysis by generating chronological tables of
the most significant authors, journals, cited reference, institutions, and countries (Thelwall,
2008). With VOSviewer, researchers can analyze a broad range of bibliometric networks,
composed of publications, authors, journals, authors, organizations, or countries (van Eck 1023
and Waltman, 2010; van Eck and Waltman, 2018), and Five types of bibliometric mapping
analysis can be used: named as coauthor, co-occurrence of keywords, citation, bibliographic
coupling and co-citation. In keyword analysis, VOSviewer utilizes a text-mining technique
to analyze the content of titles, keywords, and abstracts. Thus, researchers find different
clusters of closely associated items, which are denoted by the same cluster color. The larger
the item, the greater its significance and popularity with respect to the other items (Perianes-
Rodriguez et al., 2016).

3. Methods
This study is largely inspired by the methodology used in Vošner et al. (2017), Llanos-
Herrera and Merigo (2019) and da Silva et al. (2017). This methodology has been used to
perform bibliometric analyses of specific journals (Vošner et al., 2016; Merigo et al., 2018;
Tang et al., 2018; Byington et al., 2019) and research areas such as brand personality
(Llanos-Herrera and Merigo, 2019), e-health informatics (Kokol et al., 2018), fuzzy decision
making (Merigo et al., 2015a), accounting research (Merigo and Yang, 2017), environmental
Kuznets curves (Sarkodie and Strezov, 2019) and innovation (Merigo et al., 2016). It has also
been used to study different aspects of marketing studies, such as global branding
(Chabowski et al., 2013), business-to-business branding (Seyedghorban et al., 2016) and
value co-creation (Alves et al., 2016).
In this article, systematic quantitative and qualitative assessment of a literature of 75
prosumption publications related to marketing studies was undertaken. Quantitatively, we
used two types of bibliometric analysis: co-citation with HistCite and bibliographic coupling
and cartography analysis with VOSviewer. Furthermore, we analyzed the content of the
literature by examining all top WoS articles on prosumption and categorized them into
streams. In this bibliometric analysis, we determined interconnections among articles by
analyzing how often other articles cite and co-cite a given article related to a specific study
domain.

3.1 Data source and research process

We used the keywords prosumer/prosumption to search the WoS. The WoS is a top-quality
database, tracking top basic-science, social science, and arts and humanities journals
(Fetscherin and Heinrich, 2015). It assesses more than 22,000 journals and 50 million
publications in 70 languages and 151 research categories (Merigo et al., 2015b). For its
comprehensiveness and top-tier quality, WoS was preferred to other research engines, such
as Google Scholar, SCOPUS or SciELO.
Initially, 357 results for prosumer were found in the WoS core collection data (January
2018), but surprisingly, much of that result was from engineering and energy studies, as
shown in Figure 1. Focusing on prosumption’s significance to marketing studies, which is
related to business, management, and sociology, we refined the data, reducing it to the
categories of sociology, business, management, cultural studies, and social sciences inter-
disciplinary. This brought the dataset down to 75 papers. In the study of prosumption, the
K fields of sociology and business are intermingled and cannot easily be separated. Both
49,3 discuss customer participation exhibiting prosumption behavior which comes under
paradigm of marketing discipline. Furthermore, we noted that 8 out of 75 papers were
published in Journal of Consumer Culture, as indicated in appendix, and thus these are listed
in sociology category in WoS, but they articles discuss prosumption in the business context.
For this reason, both fields were included in the bibliometric analysis. More in-depth
1024 analysis revealed that most of the 75 papers are simple commentaries do not use qualitative
or quantitative research methodologies. A detailed analysis is given below in the findings
and discussion.
Furthermore, this study also analyzed the citation report for the 75 results from the WoS
core collection from 1999 to 2017, and found 1198 total citations, and with 15.97 average
citations per article (Figure 2). The citation graph indicates an ascending number of annual
citations, which indicates the continued emergence of prosumption in the literature. We also
found that from 2010 to 2017, various prominent authors have written on this topic, but due
to the evolutionary stage of the concept, the number of papers published per year was
decidedly lower, as indicated in Figure 3 (about 8 papers/year in 2010-2017, with the
exception of 2014-2015, with 14 papers/year).
Here, the basic unit of analysis is the research article. In the cartographical analysis, we
selected co-occurrence as the type of analysis and all keywords was chosen as the unit of
analysis.

Figure 1.
Analysis of prosumer
literature from the
WoS

Figure 2.
Prosumer
publications cited per
year in WoS
 Prosumption:
bibliometric
analysis

1025

Figure 3.
Number of
publications on
prosumption per year

3.2 Analytical tools and methods

HistCite and VOSviewer were searched for in the WoS core collection database (August
2018). It was found that only 38 studies used HistCite for bibliometric analysis, and 63 per
cent (24) of these were conducted within the final 5 years of our sample. However, 106
studies used VOSviewer for bibliometric analysis, of which 91 per cent (97) were from the
past five years (2018-2014). This analysis clearly shows the significance of these tools and
their recent emergence in contemporary studies.
In a bibliographic coupling analysis, connections among different authors is determined
by assessing the degree to which they cite the same research publications. The more often
that two unrelated authors cite the same publications, the stronger the relatedness between
them (van Eck and Waltman, 2010). Unlike the HistCite citation mapping graph, VOSviewer
bibliographic coupling highlights author names and publication years instead of a simply
numerical representation in the HistCite citation-mapping graph. Furthermore, VOSviewer
distributes research articles into clusters by similar topic, theme, or field (Ding et al., 2001).
Therefore prosumption research streams were confirmed with cartography analysis, as
shown in Figure 6.

3.3 Data analysis procedure

The 75 prosumption articles were extracted from the WoS and saved into a text document
containing authors’ names, articles’ titles, journal names, language used, document types,
abstracts, and reference lists. This information is valuable for bibliometric analysis. Then,
the file was imported into HistCite, and most influential authors, articles, journals, research
documents, languages, institutions and countries were extracted. Citation mapping related
to prosumption was also performed, and the product was output in tabular form (Garfield
et al., 2003). Then, we imported the text file into VOSviewer to extract a bibliographic
coupling and cartography analysis for prosumption. These outputs allowed us to explore
the research streams of prosumption articles in marketing.

4. Findings and discussion

4.1 Analysis of prosumption articles using HistCite
4.1.1 Yearly output and the most influential authors, articles and journals. The HistCite
analysis indicated that only 5 research articles of the 75 were published between 1997 and
K 2009. From 2010 to 2017, 68 papers were published, and 52 of these were in last four years,
49,3 as shown in Figure 3. This indicates that prosumption is a novel field. We also found that
123 researchers authored the 75 articles. The most prominent author was Ritzer, with
authorship of eight articles (Table I). Five other researchers (Cova, Darmody, Jurgenson,
Schrape, and Zwick) each authored two articles. The remainder (117) each are credited as
author on only one. We sorted the most influential authors according to the total global
1026 citation score (TGCS). The TGCS indicates how many times an article was cited by other
articles globally, while the total local citations score (TLCS) indicates how many times the
article was cited within the collection of the retrieved set. Here again, Ritzer took first place,
with a TGCS of 654, and Jurgenson had 570, but Jurgenson’s score was entirely due to his
coauthor status with Ritzer on only two publications. Similarly, Dean was third, with a score
of 89, also as a coauthor on a Ritzer paper. The following five authors (Berthon, Pitt, Watson,
Wynn, and Zinkhan) had a score of 87, all from one paper entitled “The penguin’s window:
Corporate brands from an open-source perspective” (Pitt et al., 2006). Similarly, Arvidsson
and Colleoni each had a score of 74 from one publication together (Arvidsson and Colleoni,
2012).
To more closely assess the most-influential research papers among our sample, we
ranked them using the measures TGCS and TGCS per year (TGCS/t), as shown in Table II.
The citation of Ritzer and Jurgenson (2010) attained exponential growth, with a TGCS score
of 481 and a TGCS/t of 53.44. It is the most prominent research paper in the sample (Ritzer
and Jurgenson, 2010). Following this, Ritzer et al. (2012) attracted the attention of academia,
receiving a TGCS score of 89 and an average TGCS/t of 12.71 (Ritzer et al., 2012). Pitt (2006)
and Arvidsson and Colleoni (2012) had a TGCS of 87 (TGCS/t = 6.69) and 74 (TGCS/
t = 10.57), respectively. The fact that Arvidsson and Colleoni (2012) had a much higher
TGCS/t indicates that this was more significant for prosumption studies (Arvidsson and
Colleoni, 2012). The 10 most-cited articles were all published within one decade (2010 or
later), and 5 were published in 2012, indicating that prosumption studies are relatively
novel.
In all, 42 academic journals were represented as publishers for the sample group of
papers. The most significant were assessed using a top-10 journals list with the help of
HistCite according to TGCS, as shown in Table III. Among the top-10 most influential
journals, Journal of Consumer Culture, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, and
Consumption Markets and Culture, which are all marketing studies journals. Eight articles
were published in Journal of Consumer Culture, with a total TGCS of 576 (the highest score).
Two of these were published in 2010, and the remainder were published in 2014–2017.

Sr. # Author Publications TLCS TGCS

1 Ritzer G. 8 69 654
2 Jurgenson N. 2 54 570
3 Dean P. 1 16 89
4 Berthon P. 1 3 87
5 Pitt LF. 1 3 87
Table I.
6 Watson RT. 1 3 87
Most-influential 7 Wynn D. 1 3 87
authors from 75 8 Zinkhan G. 1 3 87
prosumption 9 Arvidsson A. 1 3 74
publications 10 Colleoni E. 1 3 74
Sr. # Authors/ Year/Title TGCS TGCS/t TLCS CR
Prosumption:
bibliometric
1 Ritzer and Jurgenson (2010). Production, 481 53.44 38 51 analysis
consumption, prosumption the nature of capitalism in
the age of the digital ’prosumer’
2 Ritzer et al. (2012). The coming of age of the prosumer 89 12.71 16 63
Introduction
3 Pitt et al. (2006). The Penguin’s window: corporate 87 6.69 3 93 1027
brands from an open-source perspective
4 Arvidsson and Colleoni (2012). The value in 74 10.57 3 92
informational capitalism and on the internet
5 Ritzer (2014). Prosumption: evolution, revolution, or 51 10.2 9 68
eternal return of the same?
6 Cova and Cova (2012). On the road to prosumption: 38 5.43 4 118
marketing discourse and the development of
consumer competencies
7 Fuchs (2010). Class, knowledge and new media 31 3.44 2 10
8 Garcia-Ruiz et al. (2014). Media literacy education for 21 4.2 0 40
a New Prosumer Citizenship
9 Woermann (2012). On the slope is on the screen: 20 2.86 2 75
prosumption, social media practices, and scopic
systems in the Freeskiing subculture Table II.
10 Denegri-Knott and Zwick (2012). Tracking 17 2.43 0 55 Most-influential of 75
Prosumption Work on eBay: reproduction of desire prosumption
and the challenge of slow Re-McDonaldization publications

Sr. # Journal TGCS Publications Impact factor TLCS

1 Journal of Consumer Culture 576 8 3.579 56

2 American Behavioral Scientist 146 5 1.766 20
3 Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 87 1 5.888 3
4 Information Society 76 4 1.588 3
5 Consumption Markets and Culture 58 3 1.585 4
Table III.
6 Comunicar 38 4 2.212 1
7 Media Culture and Society 31 1 1.128 2 Most influential
8 Sociological Quarterly 20 4 0.768 5 journals among 75
9 Organization 18 5 2.121 6 prosumption
10 Journal of Engineering and Technology Management 16 1 2.419 0 publications

Again, the seminal Ritzer and Jurgenson (2010) is largely responsible for this score.
Additionally, Ritzer (2014, 2015a, 2015b) were also published in this journal. Five papers
were published in American Behavioral Scientist, with a total TGCS of 146, and all were
published in April 2012, in the issue 56 (4). Likewise, five papers were published in
Organization Journal 22 (5), in 2015, with a total TGCS of 18. Only one paper was published
in Journal of The Academy of Marketing Science, and it received a TGCS score of 87 (Pitt
et al., 2006). Following that, for more than a decade, no paper related to the prosumption field
was published in this top-ranking journal (impact factor of 5.888).
As shown in Appendix, 8 of 75 papers were published in Journal of Consumer Culture,
which is categorized as a sociology journal in WoS. Content analysis indicated that six
K papers (Ritzer and Jurgenson, 2010; Morreale, 2014; Ritzer, 2014, 2015a; Jose Planells, 2017;
49,3 Zhang, 2017) gave examples of YouTube, Web 2.0, Twitter, Wikipedia, and McDonald’s,
showing prosumption in a business context. Thus, prosumption studies in sociology provide
business as the background against which to conceptualize and explore prosumption. For
this reason, prosumption articles from both fields must be examined if we are interested in
exploring prosumption’s significance in marketing, a subject in business studies.
1028 4.1.2 Most-influential institutions and countries. In proir studies, two measurements
(TGCS and TLCS) have been used to determine the excellence of universities or institutions
and country of origin (Ding et al., 2001; Gomez et al., 2009; Apriliyanti and Alon, 2017). This
study found 94 institutions, and sorted the 10 most influential ones using TGCS (Table IV).
Publications originating in the University of Maryland received a TGCS of 654, with eight
publications by Ritzer, and the remainder each contributed to one publication.
Table V displays the most influential countries among the 75 publications: 19
publications were from the USA, with a TGCS of 780 (the highest score), while 7 articles
were related to Canada, with a TGCS of 112. The UK produced 12 articles were published,
but a lower TGCS was received (72). Only one article came out of Denmark, with a TGCS of
74. Four publications were produced in France, with a TGCS of 68, but their combined TLCS
score was 10, relatively high among countries that are not the USA. This indicates that these
four publications received significant attention from prosumption academia in marketing.
Other details can be found in Table V.

Sr. # Institution Country TGCS Publications TLCS

1 Univ Maryland USA 654 8 69

2 Bentley Coll USA 87 1 3
3 Simon Fraser Univ Canada 87 1 3
4 Univ Georgia USA 87 1 3
5 Copenhagen Business Sch Denmark 74 1 3
Table IV.
6 Univ Milan Italy 74 1 3
Most-influential 7 Aix Marseille Univ France 38 1 4
institutions among 8 Euromed Management Marseille France 38 1 4
75 prosumption 9 Univ Bocconi Italy 38 1 4
publications 10 Salzburg Univ Austria 31 1 2

Sr. # Country TGCS Publications TLCS

1 USA 780 19 75
2 Canada 112 7 5
3 Italy 112 2 7
4 Denmark 74 1 3
5 UK 72 12 1
Table V.
6 France 68 4 10
Most-influential 7 Austria 41 3 4
countries in 75 8 Spain 41 7 1
prosumption 9 Unknown 31 6 1
publications 10 Australia 24 3 3
4.2 Research streams for 75 prosumption articles Prosumption:
4.2.1 Citation mapping using HistCite. The authors show the HistCite co-citation analysis in bibliometric
Figure 4. HistCite graph marker (Figure 4) exhibited 30 articles (nodes) and 43 links
(relationship among articles) as the most cited. These articles exhibited robustly integrated
analysis
citation mapping (Figure 4), which indicates that prominent academic scholars assigned
importance and significance to published works on prosumption, citing them in their
research papers.
HistCite citation mapping exhibited a clear distinction of one seminal research article,
1029
presented as the center of many connections (represented as number 9 in Figure 4). This
article is “Production, Consumption, Prosumption: The nature of capitalism in the age of the
digital ‘prosumer’”, published by Ritzer and Jurgenson (2010) in Journal of Consumer
Culture. This article had a TLCS of 38 and a TGCS of 481 with a TGCS/t of 55.75, itself
referring to 51 cited references. In other words, this paper is the backbone of the
prosumption conceptualization in the marketing field. Another Ritzer et al. (2012) paper,
“The coming of age of the prosumer introduction,” published in the American Behavioral
Scientist, received the second-highest citation score (with both TLCS, 16, and TGCS, 89); this
article is represented as number 17 in Figure 4. The third-most-cited paper (with scores of
TLCS, 9, and TGCS, 51) is again by Ritzer (2014): “Prosumption: Evolution, revolution, or
eternal return of the same?” published in Journal of Consumer Culture. The fourth-most-
cited paper (TLCS, 04, and TGCS, 38), Cova and Cova (2012), “On the road to prosumption:
marketing discourse and the development of consumer competencies,” was published in
Consumption Markets and Culture. It is evident from Figure 4 that the theme of prosumption
was significantly mapped out by Ritzer, whose work received a large number of citations in
less than a decade, which demonstrates both its foundational importance and contemporary
prominence.
4.2.2 Bibliographic coupling using VOSviewer. This study applied the VOSviewer
bibliographic coupling technique for citation mapping. In this analysis, different units
of analysis, including journals, publications, and authors (van Eck and Waltman, 2018),
can be used. This study set publication as the unit of analysis (Zhao and Strotmann,
2008). Larger circles indicates greater importance for a publication (van Eck and
Waltman, 2010) (Figure 5).
We selected bibliographic coupling as the type of analysis, documents as the unit of
analysis, and fractional counting as the method in VOSviewer. Five citations was chosen as

Figure 4.
HistCite citation
mapping of 75
articles on
presumption
K
49,3

1030

Figure 5.
Bibliographic
coupling of 75
prosumption articles

a threshold value, and out of 75 publications, 34 achieved this value. This threshold was
selected to ensure greater rigor in the analysis. Two main clusters and two minor clusters
were created, signifying groups of themes. The first cluster was indicated by red coloration
and contained 16 articles, with the main theme of prosumer and co-creation, as indicated in
Table VII. The second cluster was expressed by green coloration, and it contained 11
articles, with the main theme of prosumer and user-generated content (UGC), shown in
Table VIII. The third and fourth clusters include four research articles and three research
articles, respectively, so they merged into the one cluster prosumer and informational
capital, as shown in Figure 5.
4.2.3 Cartography analysis using VOSviewer. After exploring research streams (clusters)
with bibliographic coupling in 75 prosumption articles, we characterized the underlying
research streams using cartography analysis through VOSviewer in Figure 6. In this
analysis, we created a map of the most frequently occurring keywords for all 75
publications. We selected co-occurrence as the type of analysis and all keywords as the unit
of analysis. We selected three shared keywords as a minimum threshold level. We isolated
the 28 most frequently occurring keywords in the 75 articles (Table VI). VOSviewer
transformed the data into a visual form and classified the frequently occurring keywords
into three main clusters in the network visualization view (Bornmann et al., 2018). Larger
circles and map labels represent greater importance and significance. Keywords with
similar colors belong to the same cluster (van Eck and Waltman, 2010) (Figure 6).
In Figure 6, clusters are differentiated by red, blue, and green. All three clusters confirm
the research streams obtained from the bibliographic coupling of 75 prosumption articles.
The main cluster, prosumer and co-creation (marked in red) exhibits 17 frequently occurring
keywords as shown in Table VI. In this cluster, prosumer, prosumption, co-creation and
consumption are very near to each other, which supports our assumption that prosumption
and co-creation have a strong relationship. The cluster prosumer and UGC cluster (green)
includes crowdsourcing, prosumers, media, participation, perspective, customers and
economy. The cluster prosumer and informational capital (blue) includes the frequently
occurring keywords; social media, labor, internet and informational capital. We also found
that the second and third clusters are relatively small, and the keywords are placed at
 Prosumption:
bibliometric
analysis

1031

Figure 6.
Cartography analysis
of 75 prosumption
articles

relatively greater distances than in prosumer and co-creation cluster. This indicates a
somewhat bit weaker but still significant relationship of prosumer with second and third
clusters in 75 prosumption articles.

4.3 Cluster analysis

The 34 research articles found to have five citations among the 75 prosumption publications
were analyzed into three clusters in tabular form (Tables VII–IX), indicating their authors,
titles, weighting (links and total link strength), and TGCS score. The paper weighting
indicated the importance and significance of the given paper within its specific cluster (van
Eck and Waltman, 2014, 2018). Articles with higher weights are shown more prominently
and close to each other than articles with lower weights (Figure 5). In this study, we used
two standard weighting attributes, number of links and total link strength, to highlight the
emergence and significance of a given article in a specific cluster. A link is a relation or
connection between two articles in bibliographic coupling analysis. Each link was assigned
a strength, which is expressed by a positive numerical value. Where the link is stronger, the
strength is higher (van Eck and Waltman, 2018). All links related to a given article were
counted together, and their strength values are calculated using VOSviewer In a value called
total link strength. Furthermore, the articles were organized from top to bottom by TGCS,
but their significances are ranked by weighting (links and total link strength) in cluster
analysis.
4.3.1 Cluster 1: prosumer and co-creation. Cluster 1 is comprised of 16 research papers,
which are presented in Table VII with their authors, titles, weightings (links and total link
strength), and TGCSs. Pitt (2006) had a TGCS of 87 but had only 11 links and a total link
strength of 10 (Table VII). Content analysis indicated that Pitt (2006) focused on corporate
branding with an open-source perspective and so received little attention from other authors.
For this reason, this paper appears further out from cluster 1 (Figure 5). However, Cova and
Cova (2012) discussed how the prosumer contributes to the development of consumer
competencies in co-creation, and it received much attention in prosumption studies (26 links
and total link strength of 28). This weighting indicates the significance and prominence of
K Sr. no keyword Co-occurrences
49,3
Cluster 1
1 Prosumer 36
2 Prosumption 29
3 co-creation 20
4 web 2.0 8
1032 5 Youtube 3
6 Age 16
7 Gender 3
8 self 3
9 Consumption 12
10 Production 6
11 Internet 8
12 Technology 6
13 Consumers 6
14 Industry 3
15 Innovation 3
16 Capitalism 6
17 Work 8
Cluster 2
1 Crowdsourcing 3
2 Prosumers 3
3 Media 4
4 Participation 4
5 Perspective 3
6 Customers 3
7 Economy 3
Table VI.
Cluster 3
Keywords with most 1 Social media 6
co-occurrence in 75 2 Labor 3
prosumption 3 Internet 8
publications 4 Informational capitalism 5

this seminal paper to cluster 1. Furthermore, Chandler and Chen (2015) and Hartmann
(2016) had considerable weight (29 and 30 links and total link strengths of 23 and 27,
respectively) in spite of their lower TGCSs (9 and 6, respectively) (Table VII). The
reason for this significant weighting is that Chandler and Chen (2015) explicitly
described the antecedents of prosumption, and Hartmann (2016) demonstrated a
practice–theoretical perspective on prosumption. Cole (2011) had much less weight in
cluster 1 (a total link strength of 3). Therefore, it is more distant, without no significant
relationship with other research papers (Figure 5). Content analysis also revealed that
its main theme was a partial disproof of Bourdieu’s theory of cultural/social (re)
production (Cole, 2011), not a focus on co-creation.
4.3.2 Cluster 2: prosumer and user-generated content. In cluster 2, 11 research articles
were found (Table VIII), and Ritzer et al. (2012) had the highest weighting (32 links and total
link strength of 44), thus having the most significance of all publications in cluster 2. The
content analysis of the paper explicitly indicates the emergence of prosumption due to the
rise of internet and social media. Denegri-Knott and Zwick (2012) had the second-highest
weighting (29 links and total link strength of 23) (Table VIII). It thus appears by Ritzer et al.
(2012) in Figure 5. Brake (2014), Collins (2010), and Morreale (2014) exhibited similar
Sr Cluster 1: prosumer and co-creation weight<Total link
no. Authors Title weight<Links> strength> TGCS

1 Pitt (2006) the penguin’s window: corporate brands from an open-source perspective 10 11 87
2 Cova and Cova (2012) on the road to prosumption: marketing discourse and the development of consumer 26 28 38
competencies
3 Woermann (2012) on the slope is on the screen: prosumption, social media practices, and scopic systems in 27 13 20
the freeskiing subculture
4 Rayna and Striukova co-creation and user innovation: the role of online 3d printing platforms 24 6 16
(2016)
5 Bonsu et al. (2010) arrested emotions in reality television 28 19 12
6 Recuber (2012) the prosumption of commemoration: disasters, digital memory banks, and online collective 26 3 11
memory
7 Chandler and Chen prosumer motivations in service experiences 29 23 9
(2015)
8 Cole (2011) the prosumer and the project studio: the battle for distinction in the field of music 21 3 9
recording
9 Maguire (2010) provenance and the liminality of production and consumption: the case of wine promoters 16 6 9
10 Dujarier (2016) the three sociological types of consumer 28 11 8
11 Bauer and crowdsourcing: global search and the twisted roles of consumers and producers 28 23 8
Gegenhuber (2015)
12 Bokek-Cohen (2015) becoming familiar with eternal anonymity: how sperm banks use relationship marketing 10 9 8
strategy
13 Johnson et al. (2014) The managed prosumer: evolving knowledge strategies in the design of information 22 8 7
infrastructures
14 Hartmann (2016) Peeking behind the mask of the prosumer: Theorizing the organization of consumptive 30 27 6
and productive practice moments
15 Cova et al. (2015b) Marketing with working consumers: The case of a carmaker and its brand community 28 25 6
16 Seran and Izvercian Prosumer engagement in innovation strategies The Prosumer Creativity and Focus Model 27 11 6
(2014)

and co-creation
Cluster 1: prosumer
Table VII.
1033
bibliometric
analysis
Prosumption:
 K
49,3

1034

and UGC
Table VIII.
Cluster 2: prosumer
Cluster 2: prosumer and UGC
Sr. no Authors Title Weight<Links> Weight<Total link strength> TGCS

1 Ritzer et al. (2012) The Coming of Age of the Prosumer 32 44 89

2 Arvidsson and Colleoni (2012) The value in Informational Capitalism and on the Internet 17 11 74
3 Fuchs (2010) Class, knowledge and new media 5 4 31
4 Garcia-Ruiz et al. (2014) Media Literacy Education for a New Prosumer Citizenship 7 2 21
5 Denegri-Knott and Zwick (2012) Tracking Prosumption Work on eBay: Reproduction of Desire 29 23 17
and the Challenge of Slow Re-McDonaldization
6 Berrocal (2014) Media prosumers in political communication: Politainment on 27 11 15
YouTube
7 Brake (2014) Are We All Online Content Creators Now? Web 2.0 and Digital 27 8 14
Divides
8 Collins (2010) Digital Fair Prosumption and the fair use defence 25 5 14
9 Morreale (2014) From homemade to store bought: Annoying Orange and the 23 7 10
professionalization of YouTube
10 Dolata and Schrape (2016) Masses, Crowds, Communities, Movements: Collective Action 22 4 9
in the Internet Age
11 DesAutels (2011) UGIS: Understanding the nature of user-generated information 26 12 8
systems
weighting in cluster 2 (27, 25, and 23 links and total link strengths of 8, 5, and 7, Prosumption:
respectively). Content analysis showed that Brake (2014) and Collins (2010) discussed bibliometric
the prosumer’s role in web 2.0, and Morreale (2014) examined the culture of YouTube
and the prosumer’s role in consuming and sharing information. Garcia-Ruiz et al. (2014)
analysis
had the lowest weighting in cluster 2 (7 links and total link strength of 2). Content
analysis indicated that this study analyzed the media literacy rate in children and
adolescents as prosumers, which was not a central interest of other researchers in this
cluster.
1035
4.3.3 Cluster 3: prosumer and informational capital. This cluster contains seven papers
(five with Ritzer authorship and two without) (Table IX). A seminal paper, Ritzer and
Jurgenson (2010), was part of this cluster, but Ritzer (2015a) instead received the highest
weighting (30 links and total link strength of 38). The content analysis of the five Ritzer
papers suggested that, due to the phenomenon of prosumption, a new form of capitalism is
emerging, prosumer capitalism, which gives firms freedom to engage consumers in value co-
creation process without compensation, bringing firms unpaid prosumers in place of poorly
paid commodified workers (Ritzer and Jurgenson, 2010; Ritzer, 2015c). Unlike the dominant
TGCS of this paper (481), Ritzer and Jurgenson (2010) received similar weighting (28 links
and total link strength of 24) to other Ritzer’s research papers: (2014), (2015b) and (2015c) (26,
26, and 28 links and total link strengths of 36, 24, and 31, respectively). These weights
indicate that the contribution of each of these papers is similar. In spite of having a TGCS of
only 13, Grinnell (2009) received low weighting in its cluster 3 (with 1 link and a total link
strength of 1). This is because Grinnell (2009) was only a commentary on Web 2.0 without
explicit research outputs or implications.

4.4 Future guidelines for other researchers

Our final purpose in this study was to propose guidelines for further exploration of the
role of prosumption in marketing discipline. For this purpose, we followed the method
of Apriliyanti and Alon (2017) to formulate Future guidelines and used content analysis
(a traditional literature review). We developed guidelines from a content analysis of
articles with comparatively high weightings (links and total link strength) in the above
respective clusters. Of 34 papers, we selected 16, nearly half from each cluster (7 of 16
from cluster 1, 6 of 11 from cluster 2, and 3 of 7 from cluster 3). The result is a synthesis
of sets of 16 research guidelines (Table X) for the above three research clusters of
prosumption in marketing.
The seven guidelines suggested by the first cluster (prosumer and co-creation) suggested
the engagement of prosumption in co-creation. Prosumers are currently taking active part in
design, manufacture, and distribution, but a research gap exists in the identification of the
key motivators that transform passive consumers into active prosumers (Cova and Cova,
2012; Chandler and Chen, 2015; Rayna and Striukova, 2016). The second cluster (prosumer
and UGC) gave the future guidance that prosumption is a new construct and in its
incubation stage, so researchers must explore new theories to explain prosumption behavior
(Arvidsson and Colleoni, 2012; Ritzer et al., 2012; Berrocal et al., 2014). In the third cluster
(prosumer and informational capital), studies suggest that prosumption is part of the basis
of informational capitalism, especially in web 2.0 (Ritzer and Jurgenson, 2010). This cluster
was found to be smaller than the others due to being at an incubation stage, but it has its
own significant influence on society and the business world (Ritzer, 2015b). Thus,
researchers could observe empirical changes in the economy and society due to the rise of
prosumer capitalism.
 K
49,3

capital
1036

Table IX.

and informational
Cluster 3: prosumer
Cluster 3: prosumer and informational capital
Sr no. Authors Title Weight<Links> Weight<Total link strength> TGCS

1 Ritzer and Jurgenson (2010) Production, Consumption, Prosumption The nature of 28 24 481
capitalism in the age of the digital ’prosumer’
2 Ritzer (2014) Prosumption: Evolution, revolution, or eternal return of the 26 36 51
same?
3 Ritzer (2015a) prosumer capitalism 30 38 14
4 Grinnell (2009) From Consumer to Prosumer to Produser: Who Keeps Shifting 1 1 13
My Paradigm? (We Do!)
5 Ritzer (2015b) automating prosumption: the decline of the prosumer and the 26 24 9
rise of the prosuming machines
6 Ritzer (2015c) the “new” world of prosumption: evolution, “return of the 28 31 9
same,” or revolution
7 Davis (2012) Prosuming Identity: The Production and Consumption of 27 10 9
Transableism on Transabled.org
Sr no Future research guidelines Authors
Prosumption:
bibliometric
Cluster 1: Prosumer and Co-creation analysis
1 What are the companies and governmental processes through Cova and Cova (2012)
which today’s customers and citizens can be transformed into
prosumers who can participate into dialogue, role play and
resource integration in value co-creation process?
2 How individual aesthetic practices (hedonism, reflection, and Woermann (2012) 1037
knowledge) can be evoked through social media?
3 Series of Quantitative studies are needed to explore the impact of Rayna and Striukova (2016)
prosumers engagement in design, manufacturing and distribution
phases during value co-creation process?
4 What are antecedents and social motivations that evoke prosumers Chandler and Chen (2015)
in co-creational process in the current marketplace and culture?
5 How consuming-producer role (prosumption) is changing Bauer and Gegenhuber (2015)
employees and organization structure?
6 How prosumers (unpaid consumers) can act as brand volunteers in Cova et al. (2015a)
co-creation process through the collaborative programmers that
are organized by the companies?
7 How business firms can design prosumer-oriented marketing Seran and Izvercian (2014)
strategies to involve them in value co-creation process?
Cluster 2: Prosumer and UGC
8 How researchers can reexamine the alienation, exploitation, Ritzer et al. (2012)
rationalization in prosumption phenomena and create larger
theories?
9 Marxist “labor theory of value” has failed to fit on prosumer Arvidsson and Colleoni (2012)
practices so which new theory can help researchers to understand
prosumption and Informational capital phenomena?
10 The authors applied McDonaldization theory on UGC in eBay Denegri-Knott and Zwick (2012)
(Web 2.0) so other researchers may apply this theory in other
cultures to prove its validity and generalizability in prosumption
context.
11 How longitudinal studies will be beneficial to observe this Berrocal (2014)
phenomenon that prosumers consume formation at massive level
but produce less UGC?
12 Future studies are needed to explore the intentions of prosumers, Dolata and Schrape (2016)
collectively accepted norms in web 2.0, and role differentiations in
prosumption phenomenon.
13 Longitudinal study is needed to test and prove user-generated DesAutels (2011)
information systems (UGIS) and its components empirically.
Cluster 3: Prosumer and informational capital
14 A series of Future studies need to explore new business models Ritzer (2010, 2015a)
that may handle prosumption capitalism in web 2.0.
15 In near future prosumption will be a mega field. Thus, researchers Ritzer (2014)
may observe theoretical and empirical changes in economy due to
the rise of prosumption as a subject. Table X.
16 What will be economical, social and cultural changes when Ritzer (2015b) Future research
prosuming machines will replace human prosumer in near future? guidelines

5. Conclusion
This article contributes to our understanding of the prosumption literature in marketing
through its systematic grouping of articles into clusters and exploration of new research
streams. We identified the most influential authors, articles, journals, institutions, and
countries related to prosumption through HistCite. Then, we explored three clusters,
K prosumer and co-creation, prosumer and UGC, and prosumer and informational capital,
49,3 performing bibliographic coupling analysis with VOSviewer. Furthermore, these research
streams were verified by cartography analysis using VOSviewer. Finally, we analyzed the
important papers in each cluster with respect to their weightings (links and total link
strength) and proposed future guidelines for other researchers. As a result of our work,
academic researchers in marketing discipline can analyze different aspects of prosumption
1038 and demonstrate the growth of the subject by topic, context and measurement.

5.1 Theoretical implications

This bibliometric analysis provides key insight for other researchers, noted among the
future guidelines in the previous section. Furthermore, it was found in the content analysis
of 75 papers on prosumption that, as regards marketing, this field in is in the incubation
stage, and little quantitative research has been conducted yet. Other researchers may wish
to construct a scale to measure quantitatively prosumption construct and check its
relationship with value co-creation and other emerging constructs in marketing. Second,
another avenue for academia could be to compare prosumption construct with other
marketing constructs such as consumer engagement, customer participation, and customer
involvement. These constructs have been studied well in marketing (Mustak et al., 2013;
Dong and Sivakumar, 2017), but their communalities and differences could be evaluated
with respect to prosumption. Third, the role of prosumption in collaborative consumption
and actor engagement should be studied explicitly and empirically because the role of
prosumption is inevitable and reciprocal in collaborative consumption (So et al., 2018; Ma
et al., 2019) and actor engagement (Alexander et al., 2018; Finsterwalder, 2018), but research
is scarce on this topic.

5.2 Practical implications

Although study of prosumption is at an early stage in marketing, as indicated by our
bibliometric analysis, content analysis showed that its impact has been dramatically
increasing in business studies and the social sciences. Resulting from the rise of web 2.0,
business firms can now engage prosumers to gain market share and competitive advantage,
regarding value co-creation (Cova and Cova, 2012; Cova et al., 2015a). Second, Prosumers are
also beginning to take a significant role in society and not only business firms but
government sectors may also exploit their citizens and prompt them to engage in
prosumption behavior and obtain economic and social benefits (Potra et al., 2015). Third,
business organizations may find win-win situations in prompting their consumers to engage
in prosumption behavior, gaining thereby near-zero marginal cost (Rifkin, 2014); this is
inevitable in the sharing economy: prosumption is not only instrumental but essential to
market promotion (Lan et al., 2017). Fourth, prosumption can be beneficial for both business
firms and consumers as consumers acquire reputations and social belonging among
acquaintances and others through UGC on social networking sites. While, business firms
utilize the same UGC to obtain profit through the advertising and sale of UGC (big data) to
other marketing companies (Boone et al., 2019; Jimenez-Marquez et al., 2019). Finally,
prosumption engagement provides an abundance of information through social media or
organization-sponsored sharing platforms, which may be conceived of as informational
capital by corporations. Corporate strategies should be formulated to develop informational
capitalism and to gain sustainable competitive advantage (Roberts, 2016; Dusi, 2018).
5.3 Limitations and future research Prosumption:
Prosumption is an emerging construct, and it is a significant phenomenon in the modern bibliometric
digital world. Our main limitation in this paper was that during citation mapping and
cluster analysis, we only considered papers with a minimum of five citations. More recent
analysis
articles thus could not show their real potential in this methodology, no matter their relative
contribution. More than half (52 of 75) of articles in this study were published in past five
years, so it is essential to repeat bibliometric analysis in five years, or at least once a decade,
to allow emerging constructs to have an impact and develop within the given field 1039
(Apriliyanti and Alon, 2017).
Second, HistCite cannot accommodate non-WoS source databases. This study thus
focused only on articles extracted from WoS, so the articles in our study are from prestigious
journals. A bias therefore might exist for high-quality publications, and non-WoS journal
articles could bear information not shown in our analysis that might impact views of
prosumption. Bibliometric software could yet be invented that would allow publications
from minor journals to be incorporated. This will help researchers to compare the construct
influences in WoS and non-WoS journals and in a broader spectrum of disciplines for
bibliometric meta-analyses.

References
Alexander, M.J., Jaakkola, E. and Hollebeek, L.D. (2018), “Zooming out: actor engagement beyond
the dyadic”, Journal of Service Management, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 333-351, doi: 10.1108/JOSM-08-
2016-0237.
Alves, H., Fernandes, C. and Raposo, M. (2016), “Value co-creation: concept and contexts of application
and study”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 5, pp. 1626-1633, doi: 10.1016/j.
jbusres.2015.10.029.
Apriliyanti, I.D. and Alon, I. (2017), “Bibliometric analysis of absorptive capacity”, International
Business Review, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 896-907, doi: 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2017.02.007.
Arvidsson, A. and Colleoni, E. (2012), “Value in informational capitalism and on the internet”,
Information Society, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 135-150, doi: 10.1080/01972243.2012.669449.
Bauer, R.M. and Gegenhuber, T. (2015), “Crowdsourcing: global search and the twisted roles of
consumers and producers”, Organization, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 661-681, doi: 10.1177/
1350508415585030.
Bellekom, S., Arentsen, M. and van Gorkum, K. (2016), “Prosumption and the distribution and supply of
electricity”, Energy, Sustainability and Society, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 6-22, doi: 10.1186/s13705-016-
0087-7.
Berrocal, S., Campos-Dominguez, E. and Redondo, M. (2014), “Media prosumers in political
communication: Politainment on YouTube”, Comunicar, No. 43, pp. 65-72, doi: 10.3916/C43-2014-06.
Bokek-Cohen, Y. (2015), “Becoming familiar with eternal anonymity: how sperm banks use relationship
marketing strategy”, Consumption Markets & Culture, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 155-177, doi: 10.1080/
10253866.2014.935938.
Bonsu, S.K., Darmody, A. and Parmentier, M.-A. (2010), “Arrested emotions in reality television”,
Consumption Markets & Culture, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 91-107, doi: 10.1080/10253860903346781.
Boone, T., Ganeshan, R., Jain, A. and Sanders, N.R. (2019), “Forecasting sales in the supply chain:
consumer analytics in the big data era”, International Journal of Forecasting, Vol. 35 No. 1,
pp. 170-180, available at: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2018.09.003.
Bornmann, L., Haunschild, R. and Hug, S.E. (2018), “Visualizing the context of citations referencing
papers published by Eugene Garfield: a new type of keyword co-occurrence analysis”,
Scientometrics, Vol. 114 No. 2, pp. 427-437, doi: 10.1007/s11192-017-2591-8.
K Brake, D.R. (2014), “Are we all online content creators now? Web 2.0 and digital divides”, Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 591-609, doi: 10.1111/jcc4.12042.
49,3
Brodie, R.J., Ilic, A., Juric, B. and Hollebeek, L. (2013), “Consumer engagement in a virtual Brand
community: an exploratory analysis”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 66 No. 1, pp. 105-114,
doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.07.029.
Byington, E.K., Felps, W. and Baruch, Y. (2019), “Mapping the journal of vocational behavior: a 23-year
1040 review”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 110, pp. 229-244, available at: https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jvb.2018.07.007.
Campbell, C. (2005), “The craft consumer: culture, craft and consumption in a postmodern society”,
Journal of Consumer Culture, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 23-42, doi: 10.1177/1469540505049843.
Chabowski, B.R., Samiee, S. and Hult, G.T.M. (2013), “A bibliometric analysis of the global branding
literature and a research agenda”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 44 No. 6,
pp. 622-634, doi: 10.1057/jibs.2013.20.
Chandler, J. and Chen, S. (2015), “Prosumer motivations in service experiences”, Journal of Service
Theory and Practice, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 220-239, doi: 10.1108/JSTP-09-2013-0195.
Christensen, R.K. and Gazley, B. (2008), “Capacity for public administration: analysis of meaning and
measurement”, Public Administration and Development, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 265-279, doi: 10.1002/
pad.500.
Cole, S.J. (2011), “The prosumer and the project studio: the battle for distinction in the field of music
recording”, Sociology-The Journal of the British Sociological Association, Vol. 45 No. 3,
pp. 447-463, doi: 10.1177/0038038511399627.
Collins, S. (2010), “Digital fair prosumption and the fair use defence”, Journal of Consumer Culture,
Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 37-55, doi: 10.1177/1469540509354014.
Cote, J.A.J.A., Leong, S.M. and Cote, J.A.J.A. (1991), “Assessing the influence of journal of consumer
research: a citation analysis”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 402-410,
doi: 10.1086/209269.
Cova, B. and Cova, V.V. (2012), “On the road to prosumption: marketing discourse and the development
of consumer competencies”, Consumption Markets and Culture, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 149-168,
doi: 10.1080/10253866.2012.654956.
Cova, B. and Dalli, D. (2009), “Working consumers: the next step in marketing theory?”, Marketing
Theory, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 315-339, doi: 10.1177/1470593109338144.
Cova, B., Pace, S. and Skalen, P. (2015a), “Brand volunteering: value co-creation with unpaid
consumers”, Marketing Theory, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 465-485, doi: 10.1177/1470593115568919.
Cova, B., Pace, S. and Skalen, P. (2015b), “Marketing with working consumers: the case of a carmaker
and its brand community”, Organization, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 682-701. doi: 10.1177/
1350508414566805.
Czuba, M. (2017), “Prosumption as a factor of sustainable development”, Problemy Ekorozwoju, Vol. 12
No. 1, pp. 55-61.
da Silva, S.V., Antonio, N. and de Carvalho, J.C. (2017), “Analysis of the service dominant logic network,
authors, and articles”, Service Industries Journal, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 125-152, doi: 10.1080/
02642069.2017.1297801.
Davis, J. (2012), “Prosuming identity: the production and consumption of transableism on transabled.org”,
American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 56 No. 4, pp. 596-617, doi: 10.1177/0002764211429361.
Denegri-Knott, J. and Zwick, D. (2012), “Tracking prosumption work on eBay: reproduction of desire
and the challenge of slow re-McDonaldization”, American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 56 No. 4,
pp. 439-458, doi: 10.1177/0002764211429360.
DesAutels, P. (2011), “UGIS: understanding the nature of user-generated information systems”,
Business Horizons, Vol. 54 No. 3, pp. 185-192, doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2010.12.003.
Ding, Y., Chowdhury, G.G. and Foo, S. (2001), “Bibliometric cartography of information retrieval Prosumption:
research by using co-word analysis”, Information Processing and Management, Vol. 37 No. 6,
pp. 817-842, doi: 10.1016/S0306-4573(00)00051-0.
bibliometric
Dolata, U. and Schrape, J.-F. (2016), “Masses, crowds, communities, movements: collective action in the
analysis
internet age”, Social Movement Studies, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 1-18, doi: 10.1080/14742837.2015.1055722.
Dong, B. and Sivakumar, K. (2017), “Customer participation in services: domain, scope, and
boundaries”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 45 No. 6, pp. 944-965, doi:
10.1007/s11747-017-0524-y. 1041
Dujarier, M.-A. (2016), “The three sociological types of consumer work”, Journal of Consumer Culture,
Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 555-571, doi: 10.1177/1469540514528198.
Dusi, D. (2018), “Beyond prosumer capitalism: retaining the original understanding of prosumption”,
Current Sociology, Vol. 66 No. 5, pp. 663-681, doi: 10.1177/0011392117697459.
Fellnhofer, K. (2019), “Toward a taxonomy of entrepreneurship education research literature: a
bibliometric mapping and visualization”, Educational Research Review, Vol. 27, available at:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2018.10.002.
Fetscherin, M. and Heinrich, D. (2015), “Consumer brand relationships research: a bibliometric citation
meta-analysis”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 68 No. 2, pp. 380-390, doi: 10.1016/j.
jbusres.2014.06.010.
Fetscherin, M., Voss, H. and Gugler, P. (2010), “30 Years of foreign direct investment to China: an
interdisciplinary literature review”, International Business Review, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 235-246, doi:
10.1016/j.ibusrev.2009.12.002.
Finsterwalder, J. (2018), “A 360-degree view of actor engagement in service co-creation”, Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 40, pp. 276-278, doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.08.005.
Fuchs, C. (2010), “Class, knowledge and new media”, Media Culture & Society, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 141-150,
doi: 10.1177/0163443709350375.
Garcia-Ruiz, R., Ramírez-García, A. and Rodríguez-Rosell, M.M. (2014), “Media literacy education for a
new prosumer citizenship”, Comunicar, Vol. 22 No. 43, pp. 15-23, doi: 10.3916/C43-2014-01.
Garfield, E. (2009), “From the science of science to scientometrics visualizing the history of science with
HistCite software”, Journal of Informetrics, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 173-179, doi: 10.1016/j.
joi.2009.03.009.
Garfield, E., Pudovkin, A.I. and Istomin, V.S. (2003), “Mapping the output of topical searches in the web
of knowledge and the case of Watson-Crick”, Information Technology and Libraries, Vol. 22
No. 4, pp. 183-187, doi: ISI>://000188258600008.
Gomez, I., Bordons, M., Fernández, M. and Morillo, F. (2009), “Structure and research performance of
Spanish universities”, Scientometrics, Vol. 79 No. 1, pp. 131-146, doi: 10.1007/s11192-009-0408-0.
Grinnell, C.K. (2009), “From consumer to prosumer to produser: who keeps shifting my paradigm? (We
do!)”, Public Culture, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 577-598, available at: https://doi.org/10.1215/08992363-
2009-009
Hartmann, B.J. (2016), “Peeking behind the mask of the prosumer: theorizing the organization of
consumptive and productive practice moments”, Marketing Theory, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 3-20. doi:
10.1177/1470593115581722.
Jimenez-Marquez, J.L., Gonzalez-Carrasco, I., Lopez-Cuadrado, J.L. and Ruiz-Mezcua, B. (2019), “Towards a
big data framework for analyzing social media content”, International Journal of Information
Management, Vol. 44, pp. 1-12, available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.09.003.
Johnson, M., Mozaffar, H., Campagnolo, G.M., Sampsa, H., Pollock, N. and Williams, R.A. (2014),
“The managed prosumer: evolving knowledge strategies in the design of information
infrastructures”, Information Communication & Society, Vol. 17 No. 7, pp. 795-813,
doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2013.830635.
K Jose Planells, A. (2017), “Video games and the crowdfunding ideology: from the gamer-buyer to the
prosumer-investor”, Journal of Consumer Culture, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 620-638, doi: 10.1177/
49,3 1469540515611200.
Kim, J. and McMillan, S.J. (2008), “Evaluation of internet advertising research: a bibliometric analysis of
citations from key sources”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 37 No. 1, doi: 10.2753/JOA0091-
3367370108.
Kokol, P., Saranto, K. and Vošner, H.B. (2018), “eHealth and health informatics competences: a systemic
1042 analysis of literature production based on bibliometrics”, Kybernetes, Vol. 47 No. 5,
pp. 1018-1030, doi: 10.1108/K-09-2017-0338.
Kotler, P. (2010), “The prosumer movement”, Prosumer Revisited SE - 2. 10.1007/978-3-531-91998-0_2.
Lan, J., Ma, Y., Zhu, D., Mangalagiu, D. and Thornton, T. (2017), “Enabling value co-creation in the
sharing economy: the case of mobike”, Sustainability, Vol. 9 No. 9, pp. 1-20, doi: 10.3390/
su9091504.
Leadbeater, C. and Miller, P. (2004), “The Pro-Am revolution: how enthusiasts are changing our
economy and society”, Demos. 1841801364.
Llanos-Herrera, G.R. and Merigo, J.M. (2019), “Overview of brand personality research with
bibliometric indicators”, Kybernetes, Vol. 48 No. 3, pp. 546-569, doi: 10.1108/K-02-2018-0051.
Luukkonen, T. (1997), “Why has Latour’s theory of citations been ignored by the bibliometric
community? Discussion of sociological interpretations of citation analysis”, Scientometrics,
Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 27-37, doi: 10.1007/BF02461121.
Ma, Y., Rong, K., Luo, Y., Wang, Y., Mangalagiu, D. and Thornton, T.F. (2019), “Value co-creation for
sustainable consumption and production in the sharing economy in China”, Journal of Cleaner
Production, Vol. 208, pp. 1148-1158, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.135.
Maguire, J.S. (2010), “Provenance and the liminality of production and consumption: the case of wine
promoters”, Marketing Theory, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 269-282, doi: 10.1177/1470593110373190.
Merigo, J.M. and Yang, J.B. (2017), “Accounting research: a bibliometric analysis”, Australian
Accounting Review, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 71-100, doi: 10.1111/auar.12109.
Merigo, J.M., Gil-Lafuente, A.M. and Yager, R.R. (2015a), “An overview of fuzzy research with
bibliometric indicators”, Applied Soft Computing Journal, Vol. 27, pp. 420-433, doi: 10.1016/j.
asoc.2014.10.035.
Merigo, J.M., Cancino, C.A., Coronado, F. and Urbano, D. (2016), “Academic research in innovation: a
country analysis”, Scientometrics, Vol. 108 No. 2, pp. 559-593, doi: 10.1007/s11192-016-1984-4.
Merigo, J.M., Mas-Tur, A., Roig-Tierno, N. and Ribeiro-Soriano, D. (2015b), “A bibliometric overview of
the journal of business research between 1973 and 2014”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 68
No. 12, pp. 2645-2653, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.04.006.
Merigo, J.M., Pedrycz, W., Weber, R. and de la Sotta, C. (2018), “Fifty years of information sciences: a
bibliometric overview”, Information Sciences, Vol. 432, pp. 245-268, doi: 10.1016/j.
ins.2017.11.054.
Morreale, J. (2014), “From homemade to store bought: annoying orange and the professionalization of
YouTube”, Journal of Consumer Culture, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 113-128, doi: 10.1177/
1469540513505608.
Mustak, M., Jaakkola, E. and Halinen, A. (2013), “Customer participation and value creation: a
systematic review and research implications”, Managing Service Quality: An International
Journal, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 341-359, doi: 10.1108/MSQ-03-2013-0046.
Nederhof, A.J. (2006), “Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the social sciences and the
humanities: a review”, Scientometrics, Vol. 66 No. 1, pp. 81-100, doi: 10.1007/s11192-006-0007-2.
Olczyk, M. (2016), “Bibliometric approach to tracking the concept of international competitiveness”,
Journal of Business Economics and Management, Vol. 17 No. 6, pp. 945-959, doi: 10.3846/
16111699.2016.1236035.
Pan, X., Yan, E., Cui, M. and Hua, W. (2018), “Examining the usage, citation, and diffusion patterns of Prosumption:
bibliometric mapping software: a comparative study of three tools”, Journal of Informetrics,
Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 481-493, doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2018.03.005. bibliometric
Perianes-Rodriguez, A., Waltman, L. and van Eck, N.J. (2016), “Constructing bibliometric networks: a analysis
comparison between full and fractional counting”, Journal of Informetrics, Vol. 10 No. 4,
pp. 1178-1195, doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2016.10.006.
Pitt, L.F., Watson, R.T., Berthon, P., Wynn, D. and Zinkhan, G. (2006), “The penguin’s window:
corporate brands from an open-source perspective”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing 1043
Science, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 115-127, doi: 10.1177/0092070305284972.
Potra, S., Branea, A.M. and Izvercian, M. (2015), “‘How to foster prosumption for value co-creation? The
open government development plan”, Proceedings of the European Conference on e-Government,
ECEG, pp. 239-245.
Prahalad, C.K. and Ramaswamy, V. (2004), “Co-creation experiences: the next practice in value
creation”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 5-14, doi: 10.1002/dir.20015.
Rayna, T. and Striukova, L. (2016), “Involving consumers: the role of digital technologies in promoting
‘prosumption’ and user innovation”, Journal of the Knowledge Economy, doi: 10.1007/s13132-016-
0390-8.
Recuber, T. (2012), “The prosumption of commemoration: disasters, digital memory banks, and online
collective memory”, American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 56 No. 4, pp. 531-549, doi: 10.1177/
0002764211429364.
Rifkin, J. (2014), The Zero Marginal Cost Society, St. Martin’s Griffin, New York, NY.
Ritzer, G. (2014), “Prosumption: evolution, revolution, or eternal return of the same?”, Journal of
Consumer Culture, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 3-24, doi: 10.1177/1469540513509641.
Ritzer, G. (2015a), “Prosumer capitalism”, Sociological Quarterly, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 413-445, doi: 10.1111/
tsq.12104.
Ritzer, G. (2015b), “Automating prosumption: the decline of the prosumer and the rise of the prosuming
machines”, Journal of Consumer Culture, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 407-424, doi: 10.1177/
1469540514553717.
Ritzer, G. (2015c), “The ‘new’ world of prosumption: evolution, ‘return of the same’, or revolution?”,
Sociological Forum, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 1-17, doi: 10.1111/socf.12142.
Ritzer, G. and Jurgenson, N. (2010), “Production, consumption, prosumption the nature of capitalism in
the age of the digital prosumer”, Journal of Consumer Culture, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 13-36, doi:
10.1177/1469540509354673.
Ritzer, G., Dean, P. and Jurgenson, N. (2012), “The coming of age of the prosumer introduction”,
American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 56 No. 4, pp. 379-398, doi: 10.1177/0002764211429368.
Roberts, J.M. (2016), “Co-creative prosumer labor, financial knowledge capitalism, and Marxist value
theory”, Information Society, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 28-39, doi: 10.1080/01972243.2015.1107163.
Samuel, A., Peattie, K. and Doherty, B. (2018), “Expanding the boundaries of brand communities: the
case of fairtrade towns”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52 Nos 3/4, doi: 10.1108/EJM-03-
2016-0124.
Sarkodie, S.A. and Strezov, V. (2019), “A review on environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis using
bibliometric and meta-analysis”, Science of the Total Environment, Vol. 649, pp. 128-145,
available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.08.276.
Seran, S. and Izvercian, M. (2014), “Prosumer engagement in innovation strategies the prosumer
creativity and focus model”, Management Decision, Vol. 52 No. 10, pp. 1968-1980, doi: 10.1108/
MD-06-2013-0347.
Seyedghorban, Z., Matanda, M.J. and LaPlaca, P. (2016), “Advancing theory and knowledge in the
business-to-business branding literature”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 8,
pp. 2664-2677, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.11.002.
K So, K.K.F., Oh, H. and Min, S. (2018), “Motivations and constraints of Airbnb consumers: findings from
a mixed-methods approach”, Tourism Management, Vol. 67, pp. 224-236, doi: 10.1016/j.
49,3 tourman.2018.01.009.
Sun, Y., Wu, S. and Gong, G. (2019), “Trends of research on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in food: a
20-year perspective from 1997 to 2017”, Trends in Food Science and Technology, Vol. 83,
pp. 86-98, doi: 10.1016/j.tifs.2018.11.015.
Tang, M., Liao, H., Wan, Z., Herrera-Viedma, E. and Rosen, M. (2018), “Ten years of sustainability (2009
1044 to 2018): a bibliometric overview”, Sustainability, Vol. 10 No. 5, pp. 1-21, doi: 10.3390/su10051655.
Tapscott, D. and Williams, A.D. (2006), Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything,
Portfolio, New York, NY.
Thelwall, M. (2008), “Bibliometrics to webometrics”, Journal of Information Science, Vol. 34 No. 4, doi:
10.1177/0165551507087238.
Toffler, A. (1980), The Third Wave, William Morrow, New York, NY.
van Eck, N.J. and Waltman, L. (2010), “Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for
bibliometric mapping”, Scientometrics, Vol. 84 No. 2, pp. 523-538, doi: 10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3.
van Eck, N.J. and Waltman, L. (2014), Measuring Scholarly Impact, Springer, Berlin. 10.1007/978-3-319-
10377-8.
Van Eck, N.J. and Waltman, L. (2018), VOSviewer Manual, Universitteit Leiden, doi: 10.3402/jac.v8.30072.
Vošner, H.B., Bobek, S., Sternad Zabukovšek, S. and Kokol, P. (2017), “Openness and information
technology: a bibliometric analysis of literature production”, Kybernetes, Vol. 46 No. 5,
pp. 750-766, doi: 10.1108/K-10-2016-0292.
Vošner, H.B., Kokol, P., Bobek, S., Železnik, D. and Završnik, J. (2016), “A bibliometric retrospective of
the journal computers in human behavior (1991-2015)”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 65,
pp. 46-58, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.026.
Watson, M. and Shove, E. (2008), “Product, competence, project and practice: DIY and the dynamics of
craft consumption”, Journal of Consumer Culture, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 69-89, doi: 10.1177/
1469540507085726.
Woermann, N. (2012), “On the slope is on the screen: prosumption, social media practices, and scopic
systems in the freeskiing subculture”, American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 56 No. 4, pp. 618-640,
doi: 10.1177/0002764211429363.
Wolf, M. and McQuitty, S. (2011), “Understanding the do-it-yourself consumer: DIY motivations and
outcomes”, AMS Review, Vol. 1 Nos 3/4, pp. 154-170, doi: 10.1007/s13162-011-0021-2.
Xie, C., Bagozzi, R.P. and Troye, S.V. (2008), “Trying to prosume: toward a theory of consumers as co-
creators of value”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 109-122, doi:
10.1007/s11747-007-0060-2.
Yuan, S.-T.T.D., Chou, S.Y., Yang, W.C., Wu, C.A. and Huang, C.T. (2017), “Customer engagement
within multiple new media and broader business ecosystem – a holistic perspective”,
Kybernetes, Vol. 46 No. 6, pp. 1000-1020, doi: 10.1108/K-01-2017-0042.
Zhang, L. (2017), “Fashioning the feminine self in ‘prosumer capitalism’: women’s work and the
transnational reselling of Western luxury online”, Journal of Consumer Culture, Vol. 17 No. 2,
pp. 184-204, doi: 10.1177/1469540515572239.
Zhao, D. and Strotmann, A. (2008), “Information science during the first decade of the web: an enriched
author cocitation analysis”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and
Technology, Vol. 59 No. 6, pp. 916-937, doi: 10.1002/asi.20799.

Zupic, I. and Cater, T. (2015), “Bibliometric methods in management and organization”, Organizational
Research Methods, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 429-472, doi: 10.1177/1094428114562629.
Appendix Prosumption:
bibliometric
# Author/Title/ Journal TLCS TGCS analysis
1 Ritzer G., Jurgenson N. 38 481
Production, Consumption, Prosumption The nature of capitalism in the age of the
digital ’prosumer’ Journal of Consumer Culture. 2010 MAR; 10 (1): 13-36
2 Collins S. 3 14 1045
Digital Fair Prosumption and the fair use defence
Journal of Consumer Culture. 2010 MAR; 10 (1): 37-55
3 Ritzer G. 9 51
Prosumption: evolution, revolution, or eternal return of the same?
Journal of Consumer Culture. 2014 MAR; 14 (1): 3-24
4 Morreale J. 0 10
From homemade to store bought: annoying Orange and the professionalization of
YouTube Journal of Consumer Culture. 2014 MAR; 14 (1): 113-128
5 Ritzer G. 2 9
Automating prosumption: the decline of the prosumer and the rise of the prosuming
machines Journal of Consumer Culture. 2015 NOV; 15 (3): 407-424
6 Dujarier M.A. 4 8
The three sociological types of consumer work
Journal of Consumer Culture. 2016 JUL; 16 (2): 555-571
7 Zhang L. 0 3
Fashioning the feminine self in “prosumer capitalism”: women’s work and the
transnational reselling of Western luxury online Journal of Consumer Culture. 2017
JUL; 17 (2): 184-204 Table AI.
8 Planells A.J. 0 0 Eight papers
Video games and the crowdfunding ideology: from the gamer-buyer to the published in Journal
prosumer-investor Journal of Consumer Culture. 2017 NOV; 17 (3): 620-638 of Consumer Culture

Corresponding authors
Muhammad Ali can be contacted at: alihafeez787@yahoo.com; alihafeez787@tongji.edu.cn and
Syed Hamad Hassan Shah can be contacted at: hamad74shah@gmail.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com