Author
Abstract
This paper provides an overview of a comparative bibliometric analysis of research on emotional intelligence in leadership performance using multiple analytical tools. Historically, bibliometric research evolved from simple citation analysis into a complex discipline that intersects with AI and ethics. As publications are continuously growing in complexity and in volumes, bibliometric analysis is increasing in importance to identify research trends, assess impact, and undercover new directions. While its methodologies provide deep insights into the evolution of knowledge, an overreliance on metrics without critical assessment can reinforce biases and hinder innovation. In this evolving context, the research assesses analysis results of well-known bibliometric tools (VOSviewer, Biblioshiny); and compare the results with the outcome of analysis performed with AI technology (Scholar GPT). Both VOSviewer and Biblioshiny offer capabilities which complement each other in supporting bibliometric research. Although AI tools in bibliometric research are controversial and still evolving, they can be considered for addressing productivity challenges which also arise in the research field due to the increased number of publications. This paper’s outcomes re-emphasize the importance of selecting the right research methodology and tools based on each research project’s requirements. In conclusion, future bibliometric research should consider hybrid models that combine quantitative precision with qualitative focus, while tools will have to balance high processing demands, increased accuracy and relevancy. Bibliometrics will continue to model progress through innovation and research objectivity.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
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:vrs:poicbe:v:19:y:2025:i:1:p:783-813:n:1007. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.