IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v129y2024i4d10.1007_s11192-024-04970-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using scientometrics to mapping Latin American research networks in emerging fields: the field networking index

Author

Listed:
  • Reynaldo Gustavo Rivera

    (Universidad Austral)

  • Carlos Orellana Fantoni

    (Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral, School of Engineering)

  • Eunice Gálvez

    (Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral, School of Engineering)

  • Priscilla Jimenez-Pazmino

    (Grinnell College)

  • Carmen Karina Vaca Ruiz

    (Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral, School of Engineering)

  • Arturo Fitz Herbert

    (Universidad Austral)

Abstract

Current scientometrics and indices are a way to map and evaluate key research topics and researchers’ performance, which facilitate networking and innovations. However, several studies have raised concerns regarding the impact of scientometrics on the development of emerging and interdisciplinary fields. Algorithms and scientometrics help develop and understand scientific networks, but they would become roadblocks for the participation of early career researchers or scientists working in geographic or epistemological peripheries, like Latin American countries and emerging fields like Science and Religion. Scientometrics would accelerate collaborations or increase the risk of epistemic bubbles where relevant ideas and results are left out. This study presents an analysis of the role of scientometrics in developing scientific networks within the context of interdisciplinary social research and their limitations for social research evaluation. Focused on the Latin American scientific networks in an emerging field, we propose and test an alternative framework and methodology: the Field Networking Index (FNI). The FNI considers the semantic relationships of published work within an interdisciplinary domain of knowledge and the scholars’ citations and co-authorships, facilitating the identification and mapping of the field’s most relevant research topics and agents. It allows the classification of authors and network hubs based on the importance of their contribution to the study of the field’s critical issues. This study’s contribution will help develop scientific metrics for funders, policymakers, researchers and universities (especially those interested in emerging fields) to identify, map, and evaluate researchers working in an interdisciplinary field, their interests and theoretical contribution to it.

Suggested Citation

  • Reynaldo Gustavo Rivera & Carlos Orellana Fantoni & Eunice Gálvez & Priscilla Jimenez-Pazmino & Carmen Karina Vaca Ruiz & Arturo Fitz Herbert, 2024. "Using scientometrics to mapping Latin American research networks in emerging fields: the field networking index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(4), pages 2309-2335, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s11192-024-04970-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-024-04970-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-024-04970-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-024-04970-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aria, Massimo & Cuccurullo, Corrado, 2017. "bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 959-975.
    2. Mario Coccia & Barry Bozeman, 2016. "Allometric models to measure and analyze the evolution of international research collaboration," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(3), pages 1065-1084, September.
    3. Ted G. Jelen & Linda A. Lockett, 2014. "Religion, Partisanship, and Attitudes Toward Science Policy," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(1), pages 21582440135, January.
    4. Freeman, C., 1991. "Networks of innovators: A synthesis of research issues," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 499-514, October.
    5. Sachin S. Gunthe & Ravindra Gettu, 2022. "A new index for assessing faculty research performance in higher educational institutions of emerging economies such as India," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4959-4976, August.
    6. Xiaozan Lyu & Rodrigo Costas, 2021. "Studying the characteristics of scientific communities using individual-level bibliometrics: the case of Big Data research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(8), pages 6965-6987, August.
    7. Matthias Aistleitner & Jakob Kapeller & Stefan Steinerberger, 2018. "The Power of Scientometrics and the Development of Economics," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(3), pages 816-834, July.
    8. Telli E. Van Der Lei & Geertje Bekebrede & Igor Nikolic, 2010. "Critical infrastructures: a review from a complex adaptive systems perspective," International Journal of Critical Infrastructures, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 6(4), pages 380-401.
    9. Ying Huang & Donghua Zhu & Qi Lv & Alan L. Porter & Douglas K. R. Robinson & Xuefeng Wang, 2017. "Early insights on the Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI): an overlay map-based bibliometric study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 2041-2057, June.
    10. Hennemann, Stefan & Rybski, Diego & Liefner, Ingo, 2012. "The myth of global science collaboration—Collaboration patterns in epistemic communities," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 217-225.
    11. Siler, Kyle & Larivière, Vincent, 2022. "Who games metrics and rankings? Institutional niches and journal impact factor inflation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    12. Wilhite, Allen & Fong, Eric A. & Wilhite, Seth, 2019. "The influence of editorial decisions and the academic network on self-citations and journal impact factors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1513-1522.
    13. Christian Weismayer & Ilona Pezenka, 2017. "Identifying emerging research fields: a longitudinal latent semantic keyword analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(3), pages 1757-1785, December.
    14. Qikai Cheng & Jiamin Wang & Wei Lu & Yong Huang & Yi Bu, 2020. "Keyword-citation-keyword network: a new perspective of discipline knowledge structure analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 1923-1943, September.
    15. Hannigan, Timothy R. & Briggs, Anthony R. & Valadao, Rodrigo & Seidel, Marc-David L. & Jennings, P. Devereaux, 2022. "A new tool for policymakers: Mapping cultural possibilities in an emerging AI entrepreneurial ecosystem," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(9).
    16. Leydesdorff, Loet & Wagner, Caroline S., 2008. "International collaboration in science and the formation of a core group," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 317-325.
    17. Abbasi, Alireza, 2016. "A longitudinal analysis of link formation on collaboration networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 685-692.
    18. Rafols, Ismael & Leydesdorff, Loet & O’Hare, Alice & Nightingale, Paul & Stirling, Andy, 2012. "How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1282.
    19. Alan L. Porter & Ismael Rafols, 2009. "Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(3), pages 719-745, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Andreas Bjurström & Merritt Polk, 2011. "Climate change and interdisciplinarity: a co-citation analysis of IPCC Third Assessment Report," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 525-550, June.
    2. Shuangqing Sheng & Wei Song & Hua Lian & Lei Ning, 2022. "Review of Urban Land Management Based on Bibliometrics," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-25, November.
    3. Seongkyoon Jeong & Jong-Chan Kim & Jae Young Choi, 2015. "Technology convergence: What developmental stage are we in?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 841-871, September.
    4. Sándor Soós & Zsófia Vida & András Schubert, 2018. "Long-term trends in the multidisciplinarity of some typical natural and social sciences, and its implications on the SSH versus STM distinction," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 795-822, March.
    5. Ran Xu & Navid Ghaffarzadegan, 2018. "Neuroscience bridging scientific disciplines in health: Who builds the bridge, who pays for it?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 1183-1204, November.
    6. Lina Xu & Steven Dellaportas & Zhiqiang Yang & Jin Wang, 2023. "More on the relationship between interdisciplinary accounting research and citation impact," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(4), pages 4779-4803, December.
    7. Xin Liu & Yi Bu & Ming Li & Jiang Li, 2024. "Monodisciplinary collaboration disrupts science more than multidisciplinary collaboration," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 75(1), pages 59-78, January.
    8. Kaltrina Nuredini, 2021. "Investigating Altmetric Information For The Top 1000 Journals From Handelsblatt Ranking In Economic And Business Studies," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(5), pages 1315-1343, December.
    9. Alfonso Ávila-Robinson & Cristian Mejia & Shintaro Sengoku, 2021. "Are bibliometric measures consistent with scientists’ perceptions? The case of interdisciplinarity in research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7477-7502, September.
    10. Xuefeng Wang & Zhinan Wang & Ying Huang & Yun Chen & Yi Zhang & Huichao Ren & Rongrong Li & Jinhui Pang, 2017. "Measuring interdisciplinarity of a research system: detecting distinction between publication categories and citation categories," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 2023-2039, June.
    11. Chen, Shiji & Qiu, Junping & Arsenault, Clément & Larivière, Vincent, 2021. "Exploring the interdisciplinarity patterns of highly cited papers," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1).
    12. Francesco Giovanni Avallone & Alberto Quagli & Paola Ramassa, 2022. "Interdisciplinary research by accounting scholars: An exploratory study," FINANCIAL REPORTING, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2022(2), pages 5-34.
    13. María del Carmen Calatrava Moreno & Thomas Auzinger & Hannes Werthner, 2016. "On the uncertainty of interdisciplinarity measurements due to incomplete bibliographic data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(1), pages 213-232, April.
    14. Lorenzo Cassi & Wilfriedo Mescheba & Élisabeth Turckheim, 2014. "How to evaluate the degree of interdisciplinarity of an institution?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(3), pages 1871-1895, December.
    15. Qinwei Cao & Manqing Tan & Peng Xie & Jian Huang, 2022. "Can emerging economies take advantage of their population size to gain international academic recognition? Evidence from key universities in China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(2), pages 927-957, February.
    16. Seokbeom Kwon & Alan Porter & Jan Youtie, 2016. "Navigating the innovation trajectories of technology by combining specialization score analyses for publications and patents: graphene and nano-enabled drug delivery," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(3), pages 1057-1071, March.
    17. Chen, Shiji & Arsenault, Clément & Larivière, Vincent, 2015. "Are top-cited papers more interdisciplinary?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 1034-1046.
    18. Qing Ke, 2023. "Interdisciplinary research and technological impact: evidence from biomedicine," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(4), pages 2035-2077, April.
    19. We Shim & Oh-jin Kwon & Yeong-ho Moon & Keun-hwan Kim, 2016. "Understanding the Dynamic Convergence Phenomenon from the Perspective of Diversity and Persistence: A Cross-Sector Comparative Analysis between the United States and South Korea," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(7), pages 1-29, July.
    20. Fontana, Magda & Iori, Martina & Montobbio, Fabio & Sinatra, Roberta, 2020. "New and atypical combinations: An assessment of novelty and interdisciplinarity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).

    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:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s11192-024-04970-z. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.