Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A study on construction and analysis of discipline knowledge structure of Chinese LIS based on CSSCI

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study proposes a method to automatically establish a narrow-sense knowledge structure for Chinese Library and Information Science (CLIS) using data from the Chinese Social Science Citation Index. The method applies multi-level clustering, using ontological ideas as theoretical guidance and ontology learning techniques as technical means. Knowledge categories generated are checked for cohesion and coupling through hierarchical clustering analysis and multidimensional scaling analysis in order to verify the accuracy and rationality of the narrow-sense knowledge structure of CLIS. Finally, the narrow-sense knowledge structure is expanded to a broad sense. Using scholars as objects in examples, this study discusses the semantic associations between topic knowledge and the other academic objects in CLIS from the micro-, meso-, and macro-levels, so as to fully explore the broad-sense knowledge structure of CLIS for knowledge analysis and applications.

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
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aleixandre, J. L., Aleixandre-Tudo, J. L., Bolanos-Pizarro, M., et al. (2015). Mapping the scientific research in organic farming: A bibliometric review. Scientometrics, 105(1), 295–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Calabretta, G., Durisin, B., & Ogliengo, M. (2011). Uncovering the intellectual structure of research in business ethics: A journey through the history, the classics, and the pillars of Journal of Business Ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 104(4), 499–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, Y. W. (2012). Tracking scientometric research in Taiwan using bibliometric and content analysis. Journal of Library and Information Studies, 10(2), 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charvet, F. F., Cooper, M. C., & Gardner, J. T. (2008). The intellectual structure of supply chain management: A bibliometric approach. Journal of Business Logistics, 29(1), 47–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. M. (2006). CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(3), 359–377.

    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 

  • Chen, C. M., & Paul, R. J. (2001). Visualizing a knowledge domain’s intellectual structure. Computer, 34(3), 65–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, J. (2014). Intellectual structure of the institutional repository field: A co-word analysis. Journal of Information Science, 40(3), 386–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danell, J. A. B. (2014). Reception of integrative and complementary medicine (ICM) in scientific journals: A citation and co-word analysis. Scientometrics, 98(2), 807–821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darvish, H., & Tonta, Y. (2016). Diffusion of nanotechnology knowledge in Turkey and its network structure. Scientometrics, 107(2), 569–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Nooy, W., Mrvar, A., & Batagelj, V. (2005). Exploratory social network analysis with Pajek. UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dehdarirad, T., Villarroya, A., & Barrios, M. (2014). Research trends in gender differences in higher education and science: A co-word analysis. Scientometrics, 101(1), 273–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erserim, A. (2016). Intellectual structure of accounting research: A historical review on the Journal of Accounting Organization Society. Accounting and Finance Research, 5(2), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ester, M., Kriegel, H. P., Sander, J., & Xu, X. (1996). A density-based algorithm for discovering clusters in large spatial databases with noise. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM SIGKDD, Portland, Oregon (pp. 226–231).

  • Falconer, S. (2015). OntoGraf. http://protegewiki.stanford.edu/wiki/Onto-Graf. Accessed by 2015-07-01.

  • Galvagno, M. (2011). The intellectual structure of the anti-consumption and consumer resistance field: An author co-citation analysis. European Journal of Marketing, 45(11–12), 1688–1701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia-Lillo, F., Ubeda-Garcia, M., & Marco-Lajara, B. (2016). The intellectual structure of research in hospitality management: A literature review using bibliometric methods of the journal International Journal of Hospitality Management. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 52, 121–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez-Alcaide, G., Castello-Cogollos, L., Navarro-Molina, C., et al. (2008). Library and information science research areas: Analysis of journal articles in LISA. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(1), 150–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong, Y., Yao, Q., Yang, Y., et al. (2016). Knowledge structure and theme trends analysis on general practitioner research: A co-word perspective. BMC Family Practice, 17, 10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hooper, R. P. (2009). Towards an intellectual structure for hydrologic science. Hydrological Processes, 23(2), 353–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hossain, M. G., Reza, A. H. M. S., Lutfun-Nessa, M., et al. (2013). Factor and cluster analysis of water quality data of the groundwater wells of Kushtia, Bangladesh: Implication for arsenic enrichment and mobilization. Journal of the Geological Society of India, 81(3), 377–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, C. P., Hu, J. M., & Deng, S. (2013). A co-word analysis of library and information science in China. Scientometrics, 97(2), 369–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hult, G. T. M. (2016). JAMS 2010–2015: Literature themes and intellectual structure. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(6), 663–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeong, S., & Kim, H. G. (2010). Intellectual structure of biomedical informatics reflected in scholarly events. Scientometrics, 85(2), 541–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H., & Lee, J. Y. (2008). Exploring the emerging intellectual structure of archival studies using text mining: 2001–2004. Journal of Information Science, 34(3), 356–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, K. M., & Reddy, A. R. M. (2016). A fast DBSCAN clustering algorithm by accelerating neighbor searching using groups method. Pattern Recognition, 58, 39–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurihara, T., Tomari, N., & Aratani, T. (2013). Trend of EASTS research in the past 20 years. In Proceedings of the eastern Asia society for transportation studies (Vol. 9).

  • Leydesdorff, L., & Vaughan, L. (2006). Co-occurrence matrices and their applications in information science: Extending ACA to the Web environment. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(12), 1616–1628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Z. (2005). Visualizing the intellectual structure in urban studies: A journal co-citation analysis (1992–2002). Scientometrics, 62(3), 385–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, R. M. (2012). Discovering and analyzing the intellectual structure and its evolution of LIS in China, 1998–2007. Scientometrics, 93(3), 645–659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, R., & Ni, C. (2011). The intellectual structure and its evolution of LIS in China based on the co-citation analysis. Journal of Library Science in China, 6, 17–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Machado, R. D., Vargas-Quesada, B., & Leta, J. (2016). Intellectual structure in stem cell research: Exploring Brazilian scientific articles from 2001 to 2010. Scientometrics, 106(2), 525–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Meyer, M., Zaggl, M. A., & Carley, K. M. (2011). Measuring CMOT’s intellectual structure and its development. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, 17(1), 1–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milojevic, S., Sugimoto, C. R., Yang, E. J., et al. (2011). The cognitive structure of library and information science: Analysis of article title words. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(10), 1933–1953.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naghizadeh, R., Elahi, S., Manteghi, M., et al. (2015). Through the magnifying glass: An analysis of regional innovation models based on co-word and meta-synthesis methods. Quality & Quantity, 49(6), 2481–2505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Olijnyk, N. V. (2015). A quantitative examination of the intellectual profile and evolution of information security from 1965 to 2015. Scientometrics, 105(2), 883–904.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, H. W., & Leydesdorff, L. (2008). Korean journals in the Science Citation Index: What do they reveal about the intellectual structure of S & T in Korea? Scientometrics, 75(3), 439–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Persson, O., Danell, R., & Wiborg Schneider, J. (2009). How to use Bibexcel for various types of bibliometric analysis. In Åström, F., Danell, R., Larsen, B., & Schneider, J. (Eds.), International society for scientometrics and informetrics, Leuven, Belgium (pp. 9–24).

  • 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 

  • Pinto, M. (2015). Viewing and exploring the subject area of information literacy assessment in higher education (2000–2011). Scientometrics, 102(1), 227–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powers, J. H. (1995). On the intellectual structure of the human-communication discipline. Communication Education, 44(3), 191–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, J. A., Hauser, K., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2012). Defining the intellectual structure of information systems and related college of business disciplines: A bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 93(2), 279–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prebor, G. (2010). Analysis of the interdisciplinary nature of library and information science. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 42(4), 256–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Protégé. http://Protege.stanford.edu. Accessed by July 1st, 2015.

  • Ravikumar, S., Agrahari, A., & Singh, S. N. (2015). Mapping the intellectual structure of scientometrics: A co-word analysis of the Journal Scientometrics (2005–2010). Scientometrics, 102(1), 929–955.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riviera, E. (2015). Testing the strength of the normative approach in citation theory through relational bibliometrics: The case of Italian sociology. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(6), 1178–1188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rusk, R. D., & Waters, L. (2015). A psycho-social system approach to well-being: Empirically deriving the five domains of positive functioning. Journal of Positive Psychology, 10(2), 141–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samiee, S., & Chabowski, B. R. (2012). Knowledge structure in international marketing: A multi-method bibliometric analysis. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(2), 364–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarafis, I. A., Trinder, P. W., & Zalzala, A. M. S. (2007). Nocea: A rule-based evolutionary algorithm for efficient and effective clustering of massive high-dimensional databases. Applied Soft Computing, 7(3), 668–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SAS. http://www.sas.com/en_us/home.html. Accessed by July 1st, 2015.

  • Seyedghorban, Z., Matanda, M. J., & LaPlaca, P. (2016). Advancing theory and knowledge in the business-to-business branding literature. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 2664–2677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sluyter, A., Augustine, A. D., Bitton, M. C., et al. (2006). The recent intellectual structure of geography. Geographical Review, 96(4), 594–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Song, M., & Kim, S. Y. (2013). Detecting the knowledge structure of bioinformatics by mining full-text collections. Scientometrics, 96(1), 183–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SPSS. http://www-01.ibm.com/software/analytics/spss/. Accessed by July 1st, 2015.

  • Su, X. (2007). Report on the academic influence of research achievement in China’s humanities and social sciences. Beijing: China Social Sciences Publishing House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Su, X., & Zou, Z. (2011). Report on the academic influence of research achievement in China’s humanities and social sciences (2011). Beijing: Higher Education Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torres-Salinas, D., & Moed, H. F. (2009). Library catalog analysis as a tool in studies of social sciences and humanities: An exploratory study of published book titles in Economics. Journal of Informetrics, 3(1), 9–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Triventi, M. (2014). Higher education regimes: An empirical classification of higher education systems and its relationship with student accessibility. Quality & Quantity, 48(3), 1685–1703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tseng, Y. H., & Tsay, M. Y. (2013). Journal clustering of library and information science for subfield delineation using the bibliometric analysis toolkit: CATAR. Scientometrics, 95(2), 503–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, H. (2010). Information resource network model and its application. Nanjing: Nanjing University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, C. H., Lee, Y. D., Chou, H. L., & Kuo, J. H. (2014). Identifying the intellectual structure of risk management studies. In Proceedings of IEEE workshop on electronics, computer and applications (IWECA), Ottawa, Canada (pp. 964–968).

  • 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 

  • Wolfram, D., & Zhao, Y. H. (2014). A comparison of journal similarity across six disciplines using citing discipline analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 8(4), 840–853.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yan, B. N., Lee, T. S., & Lee, T. P. (2015). Mapping the intellectual structure of the internet of things (IoT) field (2000–2014): A co-word analysis. Scientometrics, 105(2), 1285–1300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, S. L., Han, R. Z., Wolfram, D., et al. (2016). Visualizing the intellectual structure of information science (2006–2015): Introducing author keyword coupling analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 10(1), 132–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoo, Y. J., Lee, J. Y., & Choi, S. (2013). Intellectual structure of Korean theology 2000–2008: Presbyterian theological journals. Journal of Information Science, 39(3), 307–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, T., Ramakrishnan, R., & Livny, M. (1996). BIRCH: An efficient data clustering method for very large databases. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD international conference on management of data (Vol. 25, pp. 103–114).

  • Zong, Q. J., Shen, H. Z., Yuan, Q. J., et al. (2013). Doctoral dissertations of Library and Information Science in China: A co-word analysis. Scientometrics, 94(2), 781–799.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by Jiangsu Province’s Natural Science Foundation Project named “Study on Chinese Ontology Learning-Oriented Patent Forewarning” (No. BK20130587), as well as a major program of the National Social Science Foundation of China named “Studies on Deep Polymerization and Services of Network Information Resource-Oriented Discipline Field” (No. 12&ZD221).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Information Management of Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210023, China

    Hao Wang, Sanhong Deng & Xinning Su

Authors
  1. Hao Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sanhong Deng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xinning Su
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hao Wang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, H., Deng, S. & Su, X. A study on construction and analysis of discipline knowledge structure of Chinese LIS based on CSSCI. Scientometrics 109, 1725–1759 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2146-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2146-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation