IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jas/jasssj/2016-70-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Recent Development of Social Simulation as Reflected in JASSS Between 2008 and 2014: A Citation and Co-Citation Analysis

Author

Abstract

The research field of social simulation comprises many topics and research directions. A previous study about the early years indicated that the community has evolved into a differentiated discipline. This paper investigates the recent development of social simulation as reflected in Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation (JASSS) publications from 2008 to 2014. By using citation analysis, we identify the most influential publications and study the characteristics of citations. Additionally, we analyze the development of the field with respect to research topics and their structure in a co-citation analysis. The citation characteristics support the continuing highly multidisciplinary character of JASSS. Prominently cited are methodological papers and books, standards, and NetLogo as the main simulation tool. With respect to the focus of this research, we observe continuity in topics such as opinion dynamics and the evolution of cooperation. While some topics disappeared such as learning, new subjects emerged such as marriage formation models and tools and platforms. Overall, one can observe a maturing inter- and multidisciplinary scientific community in which both methodological issues and specific social science topics are discussed and standards have emerged.

Suggested Citation

  • Jonas Hauke & Iris Lorscheid & Matthias Meyer, 2017. "Recent Development of Social Simulation as Reflected in JASSS Between 2008 and 2014: A Citation and Co-Citation Analysis," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 20(1), pages 1-5.
    • Handle: RePEc:jas:jasssj:2016-70-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jasss.org/20/1/5/5.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hugues Bersini, 2012. "UML for ABM," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 15(1), pages 1-9.
    2. Stephen J. Bensman & Loet Leydesdorff, 2009. "Definition and identification of journals as bibliographic and subject entities: Librarianship versus ISI Journal Citation Reports methods and their effect on citation measures," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(6), pages 1097-1117, June.
    3. Paul Davidsson, 2002. "Agent Based Social Simulation: a Computer Science View," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 5(1), pages 1-7.
    4. Chi, Pei-Shan, 2016. "Differing disciplinary citation concentration patterns of book and journal literature?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 814-829.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dirk Tunger & Marc Eulerich, 2018. "Bibliometric analysis of corporate governance research in German-speaking countries: applying bibliometrics to business research using a custom-made database," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(3), pages 2041-2059, December.
    2. Alireza Mansouri & Fattaneh Taghiyareh, 2020. "Phase Transition in the Social Impact Model of Opinion Formation in Scale-Free Networks: The Social Power Effect," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 23(2), pages 1-3.
    3. Iris Lorscheid & Matthias Meyer, 2021. "Toward a better understanding of team decision processes: combining laboratory experiments with agent-based modeling," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 91(9), pages 1431-1467, November.
    4. Jonas Hauke & Sebastian Achter & Matthias Meyer, 2020. "Theory Development Via Replicated Simulations and the Added Value of Standards," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 23(1), pages 1-12.
    5. Bianchi, Federico & Grimaldo, Francisco & Squazzoni, Flaminio, 2019. "The F3-index. Valuing reviewers for scholarly journals," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 78-86.
    6. Georg Holtz & Christian Schnülle & Malcolm Yadack & Jonas Friege & Thorben Jensen & Pablo Thier & Peter Viebahn & Émile J. L. Chappin, 2020. "Using Agent-Based Models to Generate Transformation Knowledge for the German Energiewende—Potentials and Challenges Derived from Four Case Studies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-26, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Maurizio Naldi & Marta Flamini, 2018. "Dynamics of the Hirschman–Herfindahl Index under New Market Entries," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 37(3), pages 344-362, September.
    2. Ahmed Laatabi & Nicolas Marilleau & Tri Nguyen-Huu & Hassan Hbid & Mohamed Ait Babram, 2018. "ODD+2D: An ODD Based Protocol for Mapping Data to Empirical ABMs," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 21(2), pages 1-9.
    3. Xie, Yundong & Wu, Qiang & Zhang, Peng & Li, Xingchen, 2020. "Information Science and Library Science (IS-LS) journal subject categorisation and comparison based on editorship information," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4).
    4. Hossein Sabzian & Mohammad Ali Shafia & Ali Maleki & Seyeed Mostapha Seyeed Hashemi & Ali Baghaei & Hossein Gharib, 2019. "Theories and Practice of Agent based Modeling: Some practical Implications for Economic Planners," Papers 1901.08932, arXiv.org.
    5. Daniel Torres-Salinas & Nicolás Robinson-Garcia & Juan Gorraiz, 2017. "Filling the citation gap: measuring the multidimensional impact of the academic book at institutional level with PlumX," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(3), pages 1371-1384, December.
    6. Siluo Yang & Xin Xing & Fan Qi & Maria Cláudia Cabrini Grácio, 2021. "Comparison of academic book impact from a disciplinary perspective: an analysis of citations and altmetric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1101-1123, February.
    7. Lilian N. Alessa & Melinda Laituri & C. Michael Barton, 2006. "An "All Hands" Call to the Social Science Community: Establishing a Community Framework for Complexity Modeling Using Agent Based Models and Cyberinfrastructure," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 9(4), pages 1-6.
    8. Sina Hocke & Matthias Meyer & Iris Lorscheid, 2015. "Improving simulation model analysis and communication via design of experiment principles: an example from the simulation-based design of cost accounting systems," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 131-155, August.
    9. Maurizio Naldi & Marta Flamini, 2017. "Censoring and Distortion in the Hirschman–Herfindahl Index Computation," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 36(4), pages 401-415, December.
    10. Tibor Bosse & Charlotte Gerritsen, 2010. "Social Simulation and Analysis of the Dynamics of Criminal Hot Spots," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 13(2), pages 1-5.
    11. Ngo-Hoang, Dai-Long, 2019. "A research paper of Hossein Sabzian (2019), Theories and Practice of Agent based Modeling: Some practical Implications for Economic Planners, ArXiv, 54p," AgriXiv xutyz, Center for Open Science.
    12. Cathal O'Donoghue & Gijs Dekkers, 2018. "Increasing the Impact of Dynamic Microsimulation Modelling," International Journal of Microsimulation, International Microsimulation Association, vol. 11(1), pages 61-96.
    13. Leydesdorff, Loet & Bornmann, Lutz & Zhou, Ping, 2016. "Construction of a pragmatic base line for journal classifications and maps based on aggregated journal-journal citation relations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 902-918.
    14. Jorge Mannana-Rodriguez & Elea Giménez-Toledo, 2018. "Specialization and multidisciplinarity of scholarly book publishers: differences between Spanish University Presses and other scholarly publishers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(1), pages 19-30, January.
    15. Ismael Rafols & Alan Porter & Loet Leydesdorff, 2009. "Overlay Maps of Science: a New Tool for Research Policy," SPRU Working Paper Series 179, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    16. Araújo, Tanya & Fontainha, Elsa, 2017. "The specific shapes of gender imbalance in scientific authorships: A network approach," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 88-102.
    17. Maja Jokić & Andrea Mervar & Stjepan Mateljan, 2019. "Comparative analysis of book citations in social science journals by Central and Eastern European authors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(3), pages 1005-1029, September.
    18. Loet Leydesdorff, 2012. "Alternatives to the journal impact factor: I3 and the top-10% (or top-25%?) of the most-highly cited papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(2), pages 355-365, August.
    19. Guy Madison & Knut Sundell, 2022. "Numbers of publications and citations for researchers in fields pertinent to the social services: a comparison of peer-reviewed journal publications across six disciplines," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(10), pages 6029-6046, October.
    20. Tahamtan, Iman & Bornmann, Lutz, 2018. "Creativity in science and the link to cited references: Is the creative potential of papers reflected in their cited references?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 906-930.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jas:jasssj:2016-70-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Francesco Renzini (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.