Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Towards a new generic framework for citation network generation and analysis in the humanities

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Citation network analysis is one of the most developed techniques in science mapping. Various types of citation analysis have been proposed in the literature such as direct citation, co-citation and bibliographic coupling. Networks based on these citation analysis types have been used to reveal discipline structure, central players and emerging trends in STEM and social sciences. However, in the humanities large-scale citation network analysis is still underexplored, mainly due to the lack of comprehensive data sources and varying publication practices. In this paper, we investigate the unique characteristics and needs of citation analysis in the historical humanities and propose a generic framework for systematic generation and analysis of different types of citation networks based on several variables and the essential distinction between citations of primary and secondary sources. The proposed methodology was applied to a corpus of over 15,000 (both primary and secondary) books related to the research field of ancient Mediterranean religions. The obtained results show that in order to gain a deep and comprehensive understanding of a discipline’s structure it is beneficial to compare and combine the findings of several types of networks rather than focus on a single network analysis. Comparative community analysis of the networks reveals the existence of a disciplinary core only in the primary literature corpus and a hierarchical sub-discipline structure of the examined research field.

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
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Colavizza, G. (2017). The core literature of the historians of Venice. Frontiers in Digital Humanities. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdigh.2017.00014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geffet, M. & Feitelson, D. G. (2001). Hierarchical indexing and documents matching in BoW. In Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries JCDL 2001, 259–267, Roanoke, VA, USA. ACM.

  • Gingras, Y. (2010). Mapping the structure of the intellectual field using citation and co-citation analysis of correspondences”. History of European Ideas, 36(3), 330–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.histeuroideas.2010.04.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giuffrida, P. (2014). Aristotelian cross-references network: A case study for digital humanities, AIUCD '14: Proceedings of the Third AIUCD Annual Conference on Humanities and Their Methods in the Digital Ecosystem. Article No. 13, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1145/2802612.2802638.

  • Huang, Y., Lu, W., Liu, J., Cheng, Q., & Bu, Y. (2022). Towards transdisciplinary impact of scientific publications: A longitudinal, comprehensive, and large-scale analysis on Microsoft Academic Graph. Information Processing & Management, 59(2), 102859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2021.102859

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sooryamoorthy, R. (2020). Scientometrics for the humanities and social sciences. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, M. C., & Danowski, J. A. (1990). Analysis of an ancient network: Personal communication and the study of social structure in a past society. Social Networks, 12(4), 313–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-8733(90)90013-Y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, A. G. (2017). The Old Assyrian social network: An analysis of the text from Kültepe-Kanesh (1950–1750 B.C.E.). PhD Diss., Harvard University.

  • Ardanuy, J., Urbano, C., & Quintana, L. (2009). A citation analysis of Catalan literary studies (1974–2003): Towards a bibliometrics of humanities studies in minority languages. Scientometrics, 81(2), 347–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baccini, F., Barabesi, L., Baccini, A., Khelfaoui, M., & Gingras, Y. (2022). Similarity network fusion for scholarly journals. Journal of Informetrics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2021.101226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bianconi, G. (2018). Multilayer networks: Structure and function. Oxford University Pres.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Blondel, V. D., Guillaume, J.-L., Lambiotte, R., & Lefebvre, E. (2008). Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 10, P10008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgman, C. L., & Rice, R. E. (1992). The convergence of information science and communication: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43(6), 397–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyack, K. W., & Klavans, R. (2010). Co-citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, and direct citation: Which citation approach represents the research front most accurately? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(12), 2389–2404. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callahan, A., Hockema, S., & Eysenbach, G. (2010). Contextual cocitation: Augmenting cocitation analysis and its applications. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(6), 1130–1143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. (2017). Science mapping: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2(2), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1515/jdis-2017-0006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, P.-S. (2012). Bibliometric characteristics of political science research in Germany. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 49(1), 1–6.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, R., & Young, J. (2013). The interdisciplinary structure of research on intercultural relations: a co-citation network analysis study. Scientometrics, 96, 147–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0894-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colavizza, G. (2018a). The intellectual organisation of history. Lausanne: EPFL. https://doi.org/10.5075/epfl-thesis-8537.

  • Colavizza, G. (2018b). Understanding the history of the humanities from a bibliometric perspective: Expansion, conjunctures, and traditions in the last decades of Venetian historiography (1950–2013). History of Humanities, 3(2), 377–406. https://doi.org/10.1086/699300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franssen, T., & Wouters, P. (2019). Science and its significant other: Representing the humanities in bibliometric scholarship. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 70(10), 1124–1137. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hellqvist, B. (2010). Referencing in the humanities and its implications for citation analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(2), 310–318. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H. J., Jeong, Y. K., & Song, M. (2016). Content- and proximity-based author co-citation analysis using citation sentences. Journal of Informetrics, 10(4), 954–966. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.07.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knievel, J., & Kellsey, C. (2005). Citation analysis for collection development: A comparative study of eight humanities fields. The Library Quarterly, 75(2), 142–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lemercier, C. (2005). Analyse de réseaux et histoire. Revue D’histoire Moderne & Contemporaine, 52–2(2), 88–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., Hammarfelt, B., & Salah, A. (2011). The Structure of the Arts & Humanities Citation Index: A Mapping on the Basis of Aggregated Citations among 1,157 Journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(12), 2414–2426. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21636

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, S., & Chen, C. (2012). The proximity of co-citation. Scientometrics, 91, 495–511. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0575-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Y., Yang, L., & Chen, M. (2021). A new citation concept: Triangular citation in the literature. Journal of Informetrics, 15(2), 101141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melchiorsen, P. M. (2019). Bibliometric differences—a case study in bibliometric evaluation across SSH and STEM. Journal of Documentation, 75(2), 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murai, H., & Tokosumi, A. (2006). Co-citation network analysis of religious texts. Transactions of the Japanese Society for Artificial Intelligence, 21(6), 473–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Must, Ü. (2012). Alone or together: Examples from history research. Scientometrics, 91, 527–537. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0596-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nederhof, A. J. (2006). Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the Social Sciences and the Humanities: A Review. Scientometrics, 66(1), 81–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newman, M. (2014). Introduction to network science (pp. 70–72). Electronic Industry Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petr, M., et al. (2021). Journal article publishing in the social sciences and humanities: A comparison of Web of Science coverage for five European countries. PLoS ONE, 16(4), e0249879. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249879

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrovich, E. (2020). Science mapping. ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization.‏

  • Petrovich, E. & Tolusso, E. (2019). Exploring Knowledge Dynamics in the Humanities. Journal of Interdisciplinary History of Ideas 16.

  • Romanello, M. (2016). Exploring citation networks to study intertextuality in classics. Digital Humanities. Quarterly, 10(2), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Small, H. G. (1973). Co-citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of American Society for Information Science, 24(4), 28–31.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, M. C., Cheng, Y. J., & Chen, K. H. (2017). A longitudinal study of intellectual cohesion in digital humanities using bibliometric analyses. Scientometrics, 113, 985–1008. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2496-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thijs, B. (2019). Science mapping and the identification of topics: Theoretical and methodological considerations. In W. Glänzel, H. F. Moed, U. Schmoch, & M. Thelwall (Eds.), Springer handbook of science and technology indicators (pp. 213–233). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Van Raan, A. F. J. (2019). Measuring science: Basic principles and application of advanced bibliometrics. In W. Glänzel, H. F. Moed, U. Schmoch, & M. Thelwall (Eds.), Springer HANDBOOK OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY INDICATORS (pp. 237–280). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Waltman, L., & Jan van Eck, N. (2012). A new methodology for constructing a publication-level classification system of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(12), 2378–2392. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22748

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waltman, L., & Jan van Eck, N. (2014). Visualizing bibliometric networks. In: Measuring scholarly impact: Methods and practice, (pp. 285–320). Springer.

  • Waxman, J. (2021). A graph database of scholastic relationships in the Babylonian Talmud. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqab015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, H. D. (2015). Co-cited author retrieval and relevance theory: Examples from the humanities. Scientometrics, 102, 2275–2299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1483-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhitomirsky-Geffet, M., & Prebor, G. (2019). SageBook: Toward a cross-generational social network for the Jewish sages’ prosopography. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, 34(3), 676–695. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqy065

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhitomirsky-Geffet, M., Prebor, G., & Miller, Y. (2020). Ontology-based analysis of the large collection of historical Hebrew manuscripts. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, 35(3), 688–719. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqz058

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Funding was provided by Data Science Research Center, University of Haifa.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Haifa, Mount Carmel, 3498838, Haifa, Israel

    Moshe Blidstein

  2. Bar Ilan University, 5290002, Ramat Gan, Israel

    Maayan Zhitomirsky-Geffet

Authors
  1. Moshe Blidstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maayan Zhitomirsky-Geffet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Moshe Blidstein.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare they have no conflict of interest regarding this research.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Blidstein, M., Zhitomirsky-Geffet, M. Towards a new generic framework for citation network generation and analysis in the humanities. Scientometrics 127, 4275–4297 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04438-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04438-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation