Abstract
Bibliometric techniques and science mapping are widely employed in the research environment to provide an overview of the state-of-the-art of scientific knowledge on a given topic. These techniques are essential to assist the researcher's work by guiding the compilation of the bibliography to support the theory discussion. To this objective, the Smart Bibliometrics was developed to facilitate bibliometric analysis and selection of theoretical references, embodied by a system that brings intelligence, dynamism, and agility to the scientific writing process. The innovation of this methodology is the fusion of two relevant criteria applied during the bibliometric analysis process: the application of a representative metric of classification of scientific papers and dynamic visuals strategically developed. The methodology differs for providing the user with dynamic navigation and interaction experience with the data collected, innovating the approach to reaching insights within the universe of discussions of the scientific community. In addition, as an innovation factor, the method is presented in a scalable Business Intelligence (BI) system that features blunt visuals, extensive analysis repertoire, intuitive navigation, and automated updating. The development was carried out in a cutting-edge technological platform to attend information and sharing intents by employing cloud computing resources, another feature that enables interaction among researcher groups also from different institutions. Additionally, it is not necessary to install any software. The output will be available for consultation, at any time and place, just by using one device with an internet connection.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ahlgren, P., & Jarneving, B. (2008). Bibliographic coupling, common abstract stems and clustering: A comparison of two document-document similarity approaches in the context of science mapping. Scientometrics, 76(2), 273–290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1935-1
Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
Božič, K., & Dimovski, V. (2019). Business intelligence and analytics for value creation: The role of absorptive capacity. International Journal of Information Management, 46, 93–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.11.020
Chavalarias, D., & Cointet, J. P. (2008). Bottom-up scientific field detection for dynamical and hierarchical science mapping, methodology and case study. Scientometrics, 75(1), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1825-6
Chen, C. (2005). The centrality of pivotal points in the evolution of scientific networks. International CoNference on Intelligent User Interfaces Proceedings IUI. https://doi.org/10.1145/1040830.1040859
Chen, C. (2013). CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64, 1852–1863.
Chen, H., Chiang, R., & Storey, V. (2018). Business intelligence and analytics: From big data to big impact. MIS Quarterly, 36(4), 1165–1188.
Clarivate. (2017). In Memoriam: Dr Eugene Garfield.
Clarivate. (2022). Journal Citation Reports. https://clarivate.com/webofsciencegroup/solutions/journal-citation-reports/
Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2013). SciMAT: A new science mapping analysis software tool. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64, 1852–1863.
De Carvalho, G. D. G., Sokulski, C. C., Da Silva, W. V., De Carvalho, H. G., De Moura, R. V., De Francisco, A. C., & Da Veiga, C. P. (2020). Bibliometrics and systematic reviews: A comparison between the Proknow-C and the Methodi Ordinatio. Journal of Informetrics, 14, 3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2020.101043
Dervis, H. (2019). Bibliometric analysis using bibliometrix an R package. Journal of Scientometric Research, 8(3), 156–160. https://doi.org/10.5530/JSCIRES.8.3.32
Dimensions, & Inc. (2021). Linked research data from idea to impact. https://www.dimensions.ai/
Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133(March), 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
Dwyer, T., Cordeil, M., Czauderna, T., Delir Haghighi, P., Ens, B., Goodwin, S., Jenny, B., Marriott, K., & Wybrow, M. (2020). The data visualisation and immersive analytics research lab at Monash University. Visual Informatics, 4(4), 41–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visinf.2020.11.001
Ensslin, L., Dutra, A., Ensslin, S. R., Chaves, L. C., & Dezem, V. (2015). Research process for selecting a theoretical framework and bibliometric analysis of a theme: Illustration for the management of customer service in a bank. Modern Economy, 06(06), 782–796. https://doi.org/10.4236/me.2015.66074
Garfield, E. (2004). Historiographic mapping of knowledge domains literature. Journal of Information Science, 30(2), 119–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551504042802
Garfield, E. (2009). From the science of science to Scientometrics visualizing the history of science with HistCite software. Journal of Informetrics, 3(3), 173–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2009.03.009
Hardwicke, T. E., Mathur, M. B., MacDonald, K., Nilsonne, G., Banks, G. C., Kidwell, M. C., Mohr, A. H., Clayton, E., Yoon, E. J., Tessler, M. H., Lenne, R. L., Altman, S., Long, B., & Frank, M. C. (2018). Data availability, reusability, and analytic reproducibility: Evaluating the impact of a mandatory open data policy at the journal Cognition. Royal Society Open Science, 5, 8. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.180448
John Wiley & Sons, I. (2021). Cochrane Library. Potomki
López-Robles, J. R., Otegi-Olaso, J. R., Porto Gómez, I., & Cobo, M. J. (2019). 30 years of intelligence models in management and business: A bibliometric review. International Journal of Information Management, 48, 22–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.01.013
Lyon, L. (2016). Transparency: The emerging third dimension of open science and open data. LIBER Quarterly, 25(4), 153–171. https://doi.org/10.18352/lq.10113
Massimo, A., & Cuccurullo, C. (2021). Biblioshiny: the shiny interface for bibliometrix. https://bibliometrix.org/About.html
Maximo, A., & Corrado, C. (2021). biblioshiny: The shiny interface for bibliometrix.
Murgado-Armenteros, E. M., Gutiérrez-Salcedo, M., Torres-Ruiz, F. J., & Cobo, M. J. (2015). Analysing the conceptual evolution of qualitative marketing research through science mapping analysis. Scientometrics, 102(1), 519–557. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1443-z
Noyons, E. C., Moed, H., & van Raan, A. F. (1999). Integrating research performance analysis and science mapping. Scientometrics, 46(3), 591–604. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0138-9130(00)86853-7
Otlet, P. (1934). Traité de documentation: Le livre sur le livre. Théorie et pratique (Editiones Mundaneum (ed.)).
Pagani, R. N., Kovaleski, J. L., & Resende, L. M. (2015). Methodi Ordinatio: A proposed methodology to select and rank relevant scientific papers encompassing the impact factor, number of citation, and year of publication. Scientometrics, 105(3), 2109–2135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1744-x
Pallottino, F., Biocca, M., Nardi, P., Figorilli, S., Menesatti, P., & Costa, C. (2018). Science mapping approach to analyze the research evolution on precision agriculture: World, EU and Italian situation. Precision Agriculture, 19(6), 1011–1026. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-018-9569-2
Persson, O. (2017). BibExcel: a tool-box developed by Olle Persson. https://homepage.univie.ac.at/juan.gorraiz/bibexcel/
Persson, O., Danell, R., & Schneider, J. W. (2009). How to use Bibexcel for various types of bibliometric analysis. International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics., 95, 1–10.
PubMed. (2021). National Library of Medicine. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
Rodríguez-Bolívar, M. P., Alcaide-Muñoz, L., & Cobo, M. J. (2018). Analyzing the scientific evolution and impact of e-Participation research in JCR journals using science mapping. International Journal of Information Management, 40, 111–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2017.12.011
Roselli, L. R. P., de Almeida, A. T., & Frej, E. A. (2019). Decision neuroscience for improving data visualization of decision support in the FITradeoff method. Operational Research, 19(4), 933–953. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-018-00445-1
Shollo, A., & Galliers, R. D. (2016). Towards an understanding of the role of business intelligence systems in organisational knowing. Information Systems Journal, 26(4), 339–367. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12071
Small, H. (1997). Update on science mapping: Creating large document spaces. Scientometrics, 38(2), 275–293. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02457414
Soós, S. (2011). The functional anatomy of science mapping: Katy Börner: Atlas of science: Visualizing what we know. Scientometrics, 89(2), 723–726. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0480-0
Soós, S., & Kampis, G. (2012). Beyond the basemap of science: Mapping multiple structures in research portfolios: Evidence from Hungary. Scientometrics, 93(3), 869–891. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0713-x
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
Vinkler, P. (1986). Evaluation of some methods for the relative assessment of scientific publications. Scientometrics, 10(3–4), 157–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02026039
Acknowledgements
We appreciate anonymous reviewers' contributions and recommendations. All suggestions were very helpful, and we believe that by addressing the comments, our revised manuscript was significantly improved. Also, we would like to acknowledge Roberta Ribeiro Souza, who helped us to revise the English Language.
Funding
The authors did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pessin, V.Z., Yamane, L.H. & Siman, R.R. Smart bibliometrics: an integrated method of science mapping and bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics 127, 3695–3718 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04406-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04406-6