, 89:943 | Cite as

Mapping scientific institutions

  • Sebastian Grauwin
  • Pablo JensenEmail author


We have developed a set of routines that allows to draw easily different maps of the research carried out in a scientific institution. Our toolkit uses OpenSource elements to analyze bibliometric data gathered from the Web Of Science. We take the example of our institution, ENS de Lyon, to show how different maps, using co-occurrence (of authors, keywords, institutions…) and bibliographic coupling can be built. These maps may become a valuable tool for discussing institutions’ policies, as they offer different views on the institution at a global scale.


Institutions Maps Heterogeneous Governance 


  1. Agarwal, P., & Skupin, A. (Eds.) (2008). Self-organising maps: Applications in geographic information science. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  2. Bastian, M., Heymann, S., & Jacomy, M. (2009). Gephi: An open source software for exploring and manipulating networks. Proc 3rd Intl ICWSM Conf.Google Scholar
  3. Blondel, V. D., Guillaume, J.-L., Lambiotte, R., & Lefebvre, E. (2008). Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics, P10008.Google Scholar
  4. Börner, K. (2010). Atlas of science: visualizing what we know. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
  5. Börner, K., & Scharnhorst, A. (2009). Visual conceptualizations and models of science. Journal of Informetrics, 3, 161–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Börner, K., Chen, Ch., & Boyack, K. (2003). Visualizing knowledge domains. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 37, 179–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cambrosio, A., Keating, P., Mercier, S., Lewison, G., & Mogoutov, A. (2006). Mapping the emergence and development of translational cancer research. European Journal of Cancer, 42, 3140–3148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chavalarias, D., & Cointet, J.-P. (2009). The reconstruction of science phylogeny, arXiv:0904.3154v3.Google Scholar
  9. Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools. Journal of the American Society for Information Science Technology, 62, 1382–1402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fortunato, S., & Barthélemy, M. (2007). Resolution limit in community detection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of United States of America, 104, 36–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Girvan, M., & Newman, M. E. J. (2004). Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. Phys Rev E, 69, 026113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Glänzel, W. (2003). Bibliometrics as a research field: A course on theory and application of bibliometric indicators.
  13. Kessler, M. M. (1963). Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers. American Documentation, 24, 123–131.Google Scholar
  14. Klavans, R., & Boyack, K. W. (2009). Toward a consensus map of science. Journal of American Society of Information Science and Technology, 60(3), 455–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Leydesdorff, L., & Persson, O. (2010). Mapping the geography of science: Distribution patterns and networks of relations among cities and institutes. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 61(8), 1622–1634.Google Scholar
  16. Leydesdorff, L., & Rafols, I. (2009). A global map of science based on the ISI subject categories. Journal of the American Society for Information Science Technology, 60(2), 348–362.Google Scholar
  17. Nietzsche, F. (1969). On the genealogy of morals. New York: Vintage Books (cited by Flyvbjerg B, Making social science matter. Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  18. Noyons, E. C. M. (2004). Science maps within a science policy context. In: H. F. Moed, W. Glanzel, & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research, the use of publication and patent statistics in studies of ST systems (pp. 237–256). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic publishers.Google Scholar
  19. Rafols, I., & Leydesdorff, L. (2010). Science overlay maps: A new tool for research policy and library management. Journal of the American Society for Information Science Technology, 61(9), 1871–1887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Roessner, D (2000). Quantitative and qualitative methods and measures in the evaluation of research. Research Evaluation, 9(2), 125–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 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, 265–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Small, H. (1999). Visualizing science by citation mapping. Journal of American Society of Information Science, 50(9), 799–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Stirling, A. (2008). “Opening up” and “Closing down”: Power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. Science, Technology and Human Values, 33(2), 262–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wood, D., & Fels, J. (2008). The natures of maps: Cartographic constructions of the natural world. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Université de LyonLyonFrance
  2. 2.Institut des Systèmes Complexes Rhône-Alpes (IXXI)LyonFrance
  3. 3.Laboratoire de Physique, École Normale Supérieure de Lyon and UMR CNRS 5672LyonFrance
  4. 4.Laboratoire d’Économie des TransportsUniversité Lyon 2 and UMR CNRS 5593LyonFrance

Personalised recommendations