Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Contemporary intellectual structure of CSCL research (2006–2013): a co-citation network analysis with an education focus

  • Published:
International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This present study endeavors to discover the scholarly communication structure in the CSCL knowledge domain. To explore the intellectual structure of contemporary literature of CSCL research from 2006 to 2013, over a thousand research papers indexed in the leading journal publications and conference proceedings were retrieved from WOS. Accordingly, this paper adopted a series of methods to analyze these research articles from macro to micro level, including document co-citation analysis (DCA), exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and social network analysis (SNA). As a result, a total of 7,552 and 2,180 co-citation ties were obtained from 403 to 66 source papers, respectively. In addition, six intellectual subfields within the CSCL literature were extracted, namely: (1) representation, discourse & pattern, (2) factors influencing CSCL, (3) intervention and comparison, (4) critical reasoning, (5) process of social construction, and (6) design and modeling of CSCL. Central documents and publications within contemporary CSCL research were identified and presented in the undirected co-citation networks from both macro and micro perspectives. Furthermore, the dissemination of underlying subfields and pivotal documents serving as a boundary-spanning role were discussed. This is the very first attempt to integrate the bibliographical method, statistical analysis, and visualization techniques in relation to contemporary CSCL research. Further discussion and research directions for future CSCL study are provided.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Core papers listed in Table 3 are preceded by an asterisk

  • Acedo, F. J., Barroso, C., & Galan, J. L. (2006a). The resource‐based theory: Dissemination and main trends. Strategic Management Journal, 27(7), 621–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acedo, F. J., Barroso, C., Casanueva, C., & Galan, J. L. (2006b). Co‐authorship in management and organizational studies: An empirical and network analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 43(5), 957–983.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Arnseth, H. C., & Ludvigsen, S. (2006). Approaching institutional contexts: Systemic versus dialogic research in CSCL. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(2), 167–185.

  • *Arvaja, M. (2007). Contextual perspective in analysing collaborative knowledge construction of two small groups in web-based discussion. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(2–3), 133–158.

  • *Asterhan, C. S. C., & Schwarz, B. B. (2010). Online moderation of synchronous e-argumentation. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(3), 259–282.

  • *Baghaei, N., Mitrovic, A., & Irwin, W. (2007). Supporting collaborative learning and problem-solving in a constraint-based CSCL environment for UML class diagrams. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(2–3), 159–190.

  • *Baker, M., Andriessen, J., Lund, K., van Amelsvoort, M., & Quignard, M. (2007). Rainbow: A framework for analysing computer-mediated pedagogical debates. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(2–3), 315–357.

  • *Baker, M., Andriessen, J., Lund, K., van Amelsvoort, M., & Quignard, M. (2007). Rainbow: A framework for analysing computer-mediated pedagogical debates. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(2–3), 315–357.

  • Borgatti, S. P., Everette, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). UCINET for windows: Software for social network analysis. Harvard, MA: Analytical Technologies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borgman, C. L., & Furner, J. (2002). Scholarly communication and bibliometrics. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36(1), 3–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Cakir, M. P., Zemel, A., & Stahl, G. (2009). The joint organization of interaction within a multimodal CSCL medium. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(2), 115–149.

  • Carolan, B. V., & Natriello, G. (2005). Data-mining journals and books: Using the science of networks to uncover the structure of the educational research community. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 25–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, L. C., & Lien, Y. H. (2011). Using author co-citation analysis to examine the intellectual structure of e-learning: A MIS perspective. Scientometrics, 89(3), 867–886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Cress, U. (2008). The need for considering multilevel analysis in CSCL research-An appeal for the use of more advanced statistical methods. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(1), 69–84.

  • *Cress, U., & Kimmerle, J. (2008). A systemic and cognitive view on collaborative knowledge building with wikis. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(2), 105–122.

  • *De Laat, M., Lally, V., Lipponen, L., & Simons, R. J. (2007a). Investigating patterns of interaction in networked learning and computer-supported collaborative learning: A role for Social Network Analysis. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(1), 87–103.

  • *De Laat, M., Lally, V., Lipponen, L., & Simons, R. J. (2007b). Online teaching in networked learning communities: A multi-method approach to studying the role of the teacher. Instructional Science, 35(3), 257–286.

  • *De Smet, M., Van Keer, H., & Valcke, M. (2008). Blending asynchronous discussion groups and peer tutoring in higher education: An exploratory study of online peer tutoring behaviour. Computers & Education, 50(1), 207–223.

  • de Solla Price, D. J. (1965). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149(3683), 510–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *De Wever, B., Schellens, T., Valcke, M., & Van Keer, H. (2006). Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A review. Computers & Education, 46(1), 6–28.

  • *De Wever, B., Van Keer, H., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2007). Applying multilevel modelling to content analysis data: Methodological issues in the study of role assignment in asynchronous discussion groups. Learning and Instruction, 17(4), 436–447.

  • *De Wever, B., Van Keer, H., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2009). Structuring asynchronous discussion groups: the impact of role assignment and self-assessment on students’ levels of knowledge construction through social negotiation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(2), 177–188.

  • *De Wever, B., Van Keer, H., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2010). Structuring asynchronous discussion groups: Comparing scripting by assigning roles with regulation by cross-age peer tutors. Learning and Instruction, 20(5), 349–360.

  • Desmedt, E., & Valcke, M. (2004). Mapping the learning styles “jungle”: An overview of the literature based on citation analysis. Educational Psychology, 24(4), 445–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Stefano, G., Peteraf, M., & Verona, G. (2010). Dynamic capabilities deconstructed: a bibliographic investigation into the origins, development, and future directions of the research domain. Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(4), 1187–1204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Dillenbourg, P., & Hong, F. (2008). The mechanics of CSCL macro scripts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(1), 5–23.

  • *Dillenbourg, P., & Tchounikine, P. (2007). Flexibility in macro-scripts for computer-supported collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(1), 1–13.

  • *Ding, N. (2009). Visualizing the sequential process of knowledge elaboration in computer-supported collaborative problem solving. Computers & Education, 52(2), 509–519.

  • *Erkens, G., & Janssen, J. (2008). Automatic coding of dialogue acts in collaboration protocols. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(4), 447–470.

  • *Ertl, B., Kopp, B., & Mandl, H. (2008). Supporting learning using external representations. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1599–1608.

  • Everton, S. F. (2004). A guide for the visually perplexed: Visually representing social networks. Stanford, CA.

  • Freeman, L. C. (1979). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1(3), 215–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fruchterman, T. M., & Reingold, E. M. (1991). Graph drawing by force‐directed placement. Software: Practice and Experience, 21(11), 1129–1164.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Hämäläinen, R., & Häkkinen, P. (2010). Teachers’ instructional planning for computer-supported collaborative learning: Macro-scripts as a pedagogical method to facilitate collaborative learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(4), 871–877.

  • *Hernandez-Leo, D., Villasclaras-Fernandez, E. D., Asensio-Perez, J. I., Dimitriadis, Y., Jorrin-Abellan, I. M., & Ruiz-Requies, I., et al. (2006). COLLAGE: A collaborative learning design editor based on patterns. Educational Technology & Society, 9(1), 58–71.

  • Hoadley, C. M. (2005). The shape of the elephant: Scope and membership of the CSCL community. In Proceedings of th 2005 conference on Computer support for collaborative learning: Learning 2005: the next 10 years! (pp. 205–210). International Society of the Learning Sciences.

  • Hsiao, C. H., & Yang, C. (2011). The intellectual development of the technology acceptance model: A co-citation analysis. International Journal of Information Management, 31(2), 128–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Isotani, S., Inaba, A., Ikeda, M., & Mizoguchi, R. (2009). An ontology engineering approach to the realization of theory-driven group formation. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(4), 445–478.

  • *Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kanselaar, G., & Jaspers, J. (2007). Visualization of participation: Does it contribute to successful computer-supported collaborative learning? Computers & Education, 49(4), 1037–1065.

  • *Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P. A., & Kanselaar, G. (2010). Effects of representational guidance during computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 38(1), 59–88.

  • *Jeong, A. (2006). The effects of conversational language on group interaction and group performance in computer-supported collaborative argumentation. Instructional Science, 34(5), 367–397.

  • *Jeong, A., & Joung, S. (2007). Scaffolding collaborative argumentation in asynchronous discussions with message constraints and message labels. Computers & Education, 48(3), 427–445.

  • *Jermann, P., & Dillenbourg, P. (2008). Group mirrors to support interaction regulation in collaborative problem solving. Computers & Education, 51(1), 279–296.

  • *Jonassen, D. H., & Kim, B. (2010). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: design justifications and guidelines. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(4), 439–457.

  • *Jones, C., Dirckinck-Holmfeld, L., & Lindstrom, B. (2006). A relational, indirect, meso-level approach to CSCL design in the next decade. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(1), 35–56.

  • Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamada, T., & Kawai, S. (1989). An algorithm for drawing general undirected graphs. Information Processing Letters, 31(1), 7–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Kapur, M., & Kinzer, C. K. (2009). Productive failure in CSCL groups. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(1), 21–46.

  • Kienle, A., & Wessner, M. (2005). Our way to Taipei: An analysis of the first ten years of the CSCL community. In Proceedings of the 2005 conference on Computer support for collaborative learning: learning 2005: the next 10 years! (pp. 262–271). International Society of the Learning Sciences.

  • Kienle, A., & Wessner, M. (2006). The CSCL community in its first decade: development, continuity, connectivity. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(1), 9–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirschner, P. A., & Erkens, G. (2013). Toward a framework for CSCL research. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Kobbe, L., Weinberger, A., Dillenbourg, P., Harrer, A., Hämäläinen, R., & Häkkinen, P., et al. (2007). Specifying computer-supported collaboration scripts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(2–3), 211–224.

  • *Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Slotta, J. D. (2007). Internal and external scripts in computer-supported collaborative inquiry learning. Learning and Instruction, 17(6), 708–721.

  • Lee, M. H., Wu, Y. T., & Tsai, C. C. (2009). Research trends in science education from 2003 to 2007: A content analysis of publications in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 31(15), 1999–2020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., & Rafols, I. (2009). A global map of science based on the ISI subject categories. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(2), 348–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, T. C., Lin, T. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2014). Research trends in science education from 2008 to 2012: A systematic content analysis of publications in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 36(8), 1346–1372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Lonchamp, J. (2006). Supporting synchronous collaborative learning: A generic, multi-dimensional model. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(2), 247–276.

  • Lonchamp, J. (2012). Computational analysis and mapping of ijCSCL content. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(4), 475–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Long, Y., Nah, F. F. H., Eschenbrenner, B., & Schoonover, T. (2013). Computer-supported collaborative learning: a research framework. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 113(4), 605–623.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Lund, K., Molinari, G., Sejourne, A., & Baker, M. (2007). How do argumentation diagrams compare when student pairs use them as a means for debate or as a tool for representing debate? International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(2–3), 273–295.

  • McCain, K. W. (1990). Mapping authors in intellectual space: A technical overview. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 41(6), 433–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Meier, A., Spada, H., & Rummel, N. (2007). A rating scheme for assessing the quality of computer-supported collaboration processes. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(1), 63–86.

  • *Mirza, N. M., Tartas, V., Perret-Clermont, AN., de Pietro, J. F. (2007). Using graphical tools in a phased activity for enhancing dialogical skills: An example with Digalo. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(2–3), 247–272.

  • *Naidu, S., & Jarvela, S. (2006). Analyzing CMC content for what? Computers & Education, 46(1), 96–103.

  • Nerur, S. P., Rasheed, A. A., & Natarajan, V. (2008). The intellectual structure of the strategic management field: an author co‐citation analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 29(3), 319–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Noroozi, O., Busstra, M. C., Mulder, M., Biemans, H. J. A., Tobi, H., & Geelen, A., et al. (2012). Online discussion compensates for suboptimal timing of supportive information presentation in a digitally supported learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(2), 193–221.

  • *Onrubia, J., & Engel, A. (2012). The role of teacher assistance on the effects of a macro-script in collaborative writing tasks. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(1), 161–186.

  • Otte, E., & Rousseau, R. (2002). Social network analysis: A powerful strategy, also for the information sciences. Journal of Information Science, 28(6), 441–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peteraf, M., Di Stefano, G., & Verona, G. (2013). The elephant in the room of dynamic capabilities: Bringing two diverging conversations together. Strategic Management Journal, 34(12), 1389–1410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pilkington, A., & Meredith, J. (2009). The evolution of the intellectual structure of operations management—1980–2006: A citation/co-citation analysis. Journal of Operations Management, 27(3), 185–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Prinsen, F. R., Volman, M. L. L., Terwel, J., & van den Eeden, P. (2009). Effects on participation of an experimental CSCL-programme to support elaboration: Do all students benefit? Computers & Education, 52(1), 113–125.

  • Ramos-Rodríguez, A. R., & Ruíz-Navarro, J. (2004). Changes in the intellectual structure of strategic management research: A bibliometric study of the Strategic Management Journal, 1980–2000. Strategic Management Journal, 25(10), 981–1004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Reimann, P. (2009). Time is precious: Variable- and event-centred approaches to process analysis in CSCL research. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), 239–257.

  • *Rose, C., Wang, Y. C., Cui, Y., Arguello, J., Stegmann, K., Weinberger, A., et al. (2008). Analyzing collaborative learning processes automatically: Exploiting the advances of computational linguistics in computer-supported collaborative learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(3), 237–271.

  • *Rourke, L., & Kanuka, H. (2007). Barriers to online critical discourse. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(1), 105–126.

  • *Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2006). Fostering knowledge construction in university students through asynchronous discussion groups. Computers & Education, 46(4), 349–370.

  • *Schellens, T., Van Keer, H., De Wever, B., & Valcke, M. (2007). Scripting by assigning roles: Does it improve knowledge construction in asynchronous discussion groups? International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(2–3), 225–246.

  • *Scheuer, O., Loll, F., Pinkwart, N., & McLaren, B. M. (2010). Computer-supported argumentation: A review of the state of the art. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(1), 43–102.

  • *Schrire, S. (2006). Knowledge building in asynchronous discussion groups: Going beyond quantitative analysis. Computers & Education, 46(1), 49–70.

  • *Schwarz, B. B., & De Groot, R. (2007). Argumentation in a changing world. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(2–3), 297–313.

  • *Schwarz, B. B., & Glassner, A. (2007). The role of floor control and of ontology in argumentative activities with discussion-based tools. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(4), 449–478.

  • Scott, J. (1991). Social network analysis: A handbook. London, UK: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharan, Y. (2010). Cooperative learning for academic and social gains: Valued pedagogy, problematic practice. European Journal of Education, 45(2), 300–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Small, H. (1973). Co‐citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24(4), 265–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Small, H., & Griffith, B. C. (1974). The structure of scientific literatures I: Identifying and graphing specialties. Science Studies, 4(1), 17–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2002). Computer support for collaborative learning: Foundations for a CSCL community. Proceedings of CSCL 2002. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Stahl, G., & Hesse, F. (2009). Paradigms of shared knowledge. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(4), 365–369.

  • Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409–426). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Stegmann, K., Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2007). Facilitating argumentative knowledge construction with computer-supported collaboration scripts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(4), 421–447.

  • *Stegmann, K., Wecker, C., Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2012). Collaborative argumentation and cognitive elaboration in a computer-supported collaborative learning environment. Instructional Science, 40(2), 297–323.

  • *Strijbos, J. W., & Fischer, F. (2007). Methodological challenges for collaborative learning research. Learning and Instruction, 17(4), 389–393.

  • *Strijbos, J. W., Martens, R. L., Prins, F. J., & Jochems, W. M. G. (2006). Content analysis: What are they talking about? Computers & Education, 46(1), 29–48.

  • *Suthers, D. D. (2006). Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making: A research agenda for CSCL. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(3), 315–337.

  • *Suthers, D. D., Vatrapu, R., Medina, R., Joseph, S., & Dwyer, N. (2008). Beyond threaded discussion: Representational guidance in asynchronous collaborative learning environments. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1103–1127.

  • *Suthers, D. D., Dwyer, N., Medina, R., & Vatrapu, R. (2010). A framework for conceptualizing, representing, and analyzing distributed interaction. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(1), 5–42.

  • *Tchounikine, P. (2008). Operationalizing macro-scripts in CSCL technological settings. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(2), 193–233.

  • Tight, M. (2008). Higher education research as tribe, territory and/or community: A co-citation analysis. Higher Education, 55(5), 593–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, C. C., & Wen, L. M. C. (2005). Research and trends in science education from 1998 to 2002: A content analysis of publication in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 27(1), 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuire, P., & Erno, L. (2001). Exploring invisible scientific communities: Studying networking relations within an educational research community. A Finnish case. Higher Education, 42(4), 493–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uysal, Ö. Ö. (2010). Business ethics research with an accounting focus: A bibliometric analysis from 1988 to 2007. Journal of Business Ethics, 93(1), 137–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *van Aalst, J. (2009). Distinguishing knowledge-sharing, knowledge-construction, and knowledge-creation discourses. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), 259–287.

  • *van Aalst, J., & Chan, C. K. K. (2007). Student-directed assessment of knowledge building using electronic portfolios. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(2), 175–220.

  • *Van Amelsvoort, M., Andriessen, J., & Kanselaar, G. (2007). Representational tools in computer-supported collaborative argumentation-based learning: How dyads work with constructed and inspected argumentative diagrams. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(4), 485–521.

  • *van der Pol, J., Admiraal, W., & Simons, P. R. J. (2006). The affordance of anchored discussion for the collaborative processing of academic texts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(3), 339–357.

  • Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Weigel, F. K., Rainer, R. K., Jr., Hazen, B. T., Cegielski, C. G., & Ford, F. N. (2013). Uncovering research opportunities in the medical informatics field: A quantitative content analysis. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 33(1), 15–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2006). A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 46(1), 71–95.

  • *Weinberger, A., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2007). Knowledge convergence in collaborative learning: Concepts and assessment. Learning and Instruction, 17(4), 416–426.

  • Wellman, B., & Berkowitz, S. D. (1988). Social structures: A network approach (Vol. 2). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wessner, M., & Kienle, A. (2007). Interdisciplinarity in the CSCL Community- an Empirical Study. In C. Chinn, G. Erkens, & S. Puntambekar (Eds.), Proceedings of the CSCL 2007: Mice, minds, and society. New Brunswick, NJ, USA: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, H. D. (2003). Pathfinder networks and author cocitation analysis: A remapping of paradigmatic information scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(5), 423–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, H. D., & Griffith, B. C. (1981). Author cocitation: A literature measure of intellectual structure. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 32(3), 163–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, H. D., & McCain, K. W. (1998). Visualizing a discipline: An author co-citation analysis of information science, 1972–1995. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(4), 327–355.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research work was supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan, under the grant number NSC 101-2511-S-011-003-MY3.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate Institute of Digital Learning and Education, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, No. 43, Sec. 4, Keelung Rd., Taipei, 10607, Taiwan

    Kai-Yu Tang, Chin-Chung Tsai & Tzu-Chiang Lin

Authors
  1. Kai-Yu Tang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chin-Chung Tsai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tzu-Chiang Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Kai-Yu Tang or Chin-Chung Tsai.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tang, KY., Tsai, CC. & Lin, TC. Contemporary intellectual structure of CSCL research (2006–2013): a co-citation network analysis with an education focus. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn. 9, 335–363 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-014-9196-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-014-9196-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation