Redes y comunidadesde descriptores en artículos de Biblioteconomía y Ciencia de la Información (1971-2020)análisis de su evolución temporal mediante Técnicas de Análisis de Redes

  1. Carlos G. Figuerola 1
  2. Modesto Escobar Mercado 1
  3. Ängel Zazo Rodríguez 1
  4. José Luis Alonso Berrocal 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Salamanca
    info

    Universidad de Salamanca

    Salamanca, España

    ROR https://ror.org/02f40zc51

Journal:
Scire: Representación y organización del conocimiento

ISSN: 1135-3716

Year of publication: 2021

Issue Title: Organización del conocimiento, patrimonio cultural y turismo

Volume: 27

Issue: 1

Pages: 71-84

Type: Article

DOI: 10.54886/SCIRE.V27I1.4778 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Scire: Representación y organización del conocimiento

Abstract

This paper examines the keywords selected by its au-thors to describe their own scholarly work in the subject field of Library and Information Science collected in the Web of Science portal between 1971 and 2020. The main thematic subfields of research in this discipline have been identified by means of communities search algorithms of network analysis, and their temporal evo-lution has been analyzed through the use of dynamic networks. Results show keywords with high frequency, but associated with another keywords evolving over time, suggesting specialized topics. There are, be-sides, thematic groups of keywords well defined; among the thirteen areas found, the main ones have been grouped around six broad interrelated de-scriptors: bibliometrics, library, e_government, e_com-merce, information_literacyand knowledge_manage-ment, whose evolutions are manifested in different pat-terns

€ View funding

Funding information

Este trabajo ha sido financiado por Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades, Programa estatal de Generación del Conocimiento. Ref.: PGC2018-093755-B-I00.

Funders

Bibliographic References

  • Abrizah, A.; Zainab, A. N.; Kiran, K.; Raj, R. G. (2013). LIS journals scientific impact and subject categorization: a comparison between Web of Science and Scopus. // Scientometrics. 94:2, 721-740
  • Arif, T. (2015). The mathematics of social network analysis: Metrics for academic social networks. International Journalof Computer Applications Technology and Research. 4:12, 889-893.
  • Bohlin, L.; Edler, D.; Lancichinetti, A.; Rosvall, M. (2014). Community detection and visualization of networks with the map equation framework. // Measuring scholarly impact. Springer. 3-34
  • Chen, X.; Chen, J.; Wu, D.; Xie, Y.; Li, J. (2016). Mapping the research trends by coword analysis based on keywords from funded project. // Procedia Computer Science. 91, 547-555.
  • Cheng, F.-F.; Huang, Y.-W.; Yu, H.-C.; Wu, C.-S. (2018). Mapping knowledge structure by keyword co-occurrence and social network analysis: Evidence from Library Hi Tech between 2006 and 2017. // Library Hi Tech. 36:4. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-01-2018-0004
  • Csardi, G.; Nepusz, T. (2006). The igraph software package for complexnetwork research. // Inter. Journal, Complex Systems, 1695.
  • Doreian, P.; Woodard, K. L. (1994). Defining and locating cores and boundaries of social networks. // Social networks. 16:4, 267-293.
  • Dotsika, F.; Watkins, A. (2017). Identifying potentially disruptive trends by means of keyword network analysis. // Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 119, 114-127.
  • Duvvuru, A.; Kamarthi, S.; Sultornsanee, S. (2012). Undercovering research trends: Network analysis of keywords in scholarly articles. // 2012 Ninth International Conference on Computer Science and Software Engineering (JCSSE). 265-270.
  • Escobar, M. (2015). Studying Coincidences with Network Analysis and other Multivariate Tools. // The Stata Journal. 15:4, 1118-1156.
  • Escobar, M.; Martínez, L. (2020). Network Coincidence Analysis: the netCoin R Package. // Journal of Statistical Software. 93:11, 1-31.
  • Figuerola, C. G.; García Marco, J. & Pinto, M. (2017). Mapping the evolution of library and information science (1978–2014) using topic modeling on LISA. // Scientometrics. 112:3 1507-1535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2432-9
  • Gil Leiva, I.; Alonso Arroyo, A. (2005). La relación entre las palabras clave aportadas por autores de artículos de revista y su indización en las bases de datos ISOC, IME e ICYT.
  • Gil-Leiva, I.; Rodríguez-Muñoz, J.-V. (1997). Análisis de los descriptores de diferentes áreas de conocimiento. // Revista española de documentación científica. 20:2, 150-160.
  • Jaewoo, C.; Woonsun, K. (2014). Themes and trends in Korean educational technology research: A social network analysis of keywords. // Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 131, 171-176.
  • Leydesdorff, L. (2002). The communication turn in the theory of social systems. // Systems Research and Behavioral Science: The Official Journal of the International Federation for Systems Research. 19:2, 129-136.
  • Leydesdorff, L.; Vaughan, L. (2006). Co-occurrence matrices and their applications in information science: Extending ACA to the Web environment. // Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 57(12), 1616-1628.
  • Lee, P.-C.; Su, H.-N. (2010). Investigating the structure of regional innovation system research through keyword co-occurrence and social network analysis. // Innovation. 12:1,26-40.
  • Leiva, I. G. (2002). Consistencia en la indización de documentos entre indizadores noveles. // Anales de documentación. 5, 99-111.
  • Li, M. (2018). Classifying and ranking topic terms based on a novel approach: Role differentiation of author keywords. // Scientometrics. 116:1, 77-100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2741-7
  • Lozano, S.; Calzada-Infante, L.; Adenso-Díaz, B.; García, S. (2019). Complex network analysis of keywords co-occurrence in the recent efficiency analysis literature. // Scientometrics. 120:2, 609-629.
  • Lu, W.; Liu, Z.; Huang, Y.; Bu, Y.; Li, X.; Cheng, Q. (2020). How do authors select keywords? A preliminary study of author keyword selection behavior. // Journal of Informe-trics. 14:4, 101066.
  • Miller, George A. (1995). WordNet: A Lexical Database for English. // Communications of the ACM. 38:11: 39-41.
  • Min, K.; Yoon, M.; Furuya, K. (2019). A Comparison of a smart city’s trends in urban planning before and after 2016 through keyword network analysis. // Sustainability. 11(11), 3155.
  • Mokhtarpour, R.; Khasseh, A. A. (2020). Twenty-six years of LIS research focus and hot spots, 1990–2016: A co-word analysis. // Journal of Information Science. 0165551520932119.
  • Onyancha, O. B. (2018). Forty-five years of LIS research evolution, 1971–2015:An informetrics study of the author-supplied keywords. // Publishing research quarterly. 34:3, 456-470.
  • Otte, E.; Rousseau, R. (2002). Social network analysis: A powerful strategy, also for the information sciences. // Journal of information Science. 28:6, 441-453.
  • Park, J.; Jeong, E. (2019). Service quality in tourism: A syste-matic literature review and keyword network analysis. // Sustainability. 11(13), 3665.
  • Park, J. S.; Kim, N. R.; Han, E. J. (2018). Analysis of trends in science and technology using keyword network analysis. // Journal of the Korea Industrial Information Systems Research, 23:2, 63-73.
  • Peña, L. J. M. (2012). Análisis bibliométrico sobre la producción científica archivística en la Red de Revistas Científicas de América Latina y el Caribe (Redalyc) durante el período 2001-2011. // Biblios. 48, 1-11.
  • Pérez, V. A.; Urbáez, M. F. (2016). Modelos teóricos de gestión del conocimiento: Descriptores, conceptualizaciones y enfoques. // Entreciencias: diálogos en la Sociedad del Conocimiento. 4:10201-227.
  • Peset, F.; Garzón-Farinós, F.; González, L. M.; García-Massó, X.; Ferrer-Sapena, A.; Toca-Herrera, J. L.; Sánchez-Pérez, E. A. (2020). Survival analysis of author keywords: An application to the library and information sciences area. // Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71:4, 462-473.
  • Plantié, M.; Crampes, M. (2013). Survey on social community detection. // Social media retrieval (pp. 65-85). Springer.
  • Rodríguez Cruz, Y.; Martínez Rodríguez, A. (2009). Comportamiento de la producción científica sobre gestión de información en revistas del Web of Science (1995-2008). // Acimed. 20:6, 101-124.
  • Rosvall, M.; Axelsson, D.; Bergstrom, C. T. (2009). The map equation. // The European Physical Journal Special Topics. 178:1, 13-23.
  • Strader, C. R. (2011). Author-assigned keywords versus Library of Congress subject headings. // Library resources & technical services. 53:4, 243-250.
  • Tous, M. G.; Mattar, S. (2012). Las claves de las palabras clave en los artículos científicos. // Revista MVZ Córdoba. 17:2, 2955-2956.
  • Traag, V. A.; Waltman, L.; Van Eck, N. J. (2019). From Lou-vain to Leiden: Guaranteeing well-connected communities. // Scientific reports. 9:1, 1-12.
  • Tripathi, M.; Kumar, S.; Sonker, S. K.; Babbar, P. (2018). Occurrence of author keywords and keywords plus in social sciences and humanities research: A preliminary study. // COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management. 12:2, 215-232.
  • Uddin, S.; Khan, A. (2016). The impact of author-selected keywords on citation counts. Journal of Informetrics. 10:4, 1166-1177.
  • Van der Hulst, R. C. (2009). Introduction to Social Network Analysis (SNA) as an investigative tool. // Trends in Organized Crime. 12:2, 101-121.
  • Woolgar, S. and Latour, B. (1988) La vie de laboratoire: la production des faits scientifiques. Editions La Découverte, 1988.
  • Yoo, S.; Jang, S.; Byun, S. W.; Park, S. (2019). Exploring hu-man resource development research themes: A keyword network analysis. // Human Resource Development Quar-terly. 30:2, 155-174.
Data source: Dialnet