Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Application status of qualitative comparative analysis methods in the international ISLS field based on social network analysis

  • S.I. : Machine Learning and Big Data Analytics for IoT Security and Privacy (SPIoT 2022)
  • Published:
Neural Computing and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper explores the knowledge network structure of foreign research literature by applying the qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) method to the field of information science and library science (ISLS) from the perspective of the cocitation of social network actors such as authors, institutions, countries, and literature, and it further reveals the future application trends of this method. [Method/process] Based on 86 journals in the ISLS field that were downloaded from the Web of Science using the QCA method, the social network analysis (SNA) method and the visual analysis tool Gephi are used to analyse the author cooperation network, the research institution cooperation network, the national cooperation network, the cocitation network, the cutting-edge trends, etc., of journal papers. The analysis shows that the QCA method covers a wide range within the field of ISLS, but the research topics involved in this field are not concentrated, and the author cooperation network has scale-free characteristics. The application of the QCA method is still dominant in European and American countries, and China, the USA, and Italy all play key roles in the national cooperation network. Finally, the institutional cooperation network has certain small group attributes.

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

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published manuscript.

References

  1. Ragin C (2008) Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. Bibliovault OAI Repository, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226702797.001.0001

    Book  Google Scholar 

  2. Yunzhou D, Liangding J (2017) Configuration perspective and qualitative comparative analysis (QCA): a new way of management research. Manag World. https://doi.org/10.19744/j.cnki.11-1235/f.2017.06.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Du Y, Kim PH (2021) One size does not fit all: Strategy configurations, complex environments, and new venture performance in emerging economies. J Bus Res 124:272–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.11.059

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chu Y, Chi M, Wang W, Luo B (2019) the impact of information technology capabilities of manufacturing enterprises on innovation performance: evidences from SEM and fsQCA. Sustainability 11:5946. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11215946

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Pappas IO, Woodside AG (2021) Fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA): guidelines for research practice in information systems and marketing. Int J Inf Manag 58:102310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Furnari S, Crilly D, Misangyi VF, Greckhamer T, Fiss PC, Aguilera RV (2021) Capturing causal complexity: heuristics for configurational theorizing. Acad Manag Rev 46:778–799. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2019.0298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Mattke J, Maier C, Weitzel T, Thatcher JB (2021) Qualitative comparative analysis in the information systems discipline: a literature review and methodological recommendations. Internet Res 31:1493–1517. https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-09-2020-0529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cross R, Parker A, Prusak L, Borgatti S (2001) Knowing what we know: supporting knowledge creation and sharing in social networks. Organ Dyn 30:100–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-2616(01)00046-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Khan GF, Sarstedt M, Shiau W-L, Hair JF, Ringle CM, Fritze MP (2019) Methodological research on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): an analysis based on social network approaches. INTR 29:407–429. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-12-2017-0509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Leischnig A, Kasper-Brauer K (2015) Employee adaptive behavior in service enactments. J Bus Res 68:273–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.07.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Liu Y, Mezei J, Kostakos V, Li H (2017) Applying configurational analysis to IS behavioural research: a methodological alternative for modelling combinatorial complexities. Inf Syst J 27:59–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12094

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Li Y, Ma L (2019) What drives the governance of ridesharing? A fuzzy-set QCA of local regulations in China. Policy Sci 52:601–624. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-019-09359-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. McAlearney AS, Walker D, Moss AD, Bickell NA (2016) Using Qualitative comparative analysis of key informant interviews in health services research: enhancing a study of adjuvant therapy use in breast cancer care. Med Care 54:400–405. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000000503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. del Carmen G-E, Valero-Moreno S, Javier Prado-Gasco V (2019) Evaluation of emotional skills in nursing using regression and QCA models: a transversal study. Nurse Educ Today 74:31–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2018.11.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Toots A, Lauri T (2015) Institutional and contextual factors of quality in civic and citizenship education: exploring possibilities of qualitative comparative analysis. Comp Educ 51:247–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2014.985926

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Snelson-Powell A, Grosvold J, Millington A (2016) Business school legitimacy and the challenge of sustainability: a fuzzy set analysis of institutional decoupling. Acad Manag Learn Educ 15:703–723. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2015.0307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kunz NC, Fischer M, Ingold K, Hering JG (2015) Why do some water utilities recycle more than others? A qualitative comparative analysis in New South Wales, Australia. Environ Sci Technol 49:8287–8296. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b01827

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Peletz R, Kisiangani J, Bonham M, Ronoh P, Delaire C, Kumpel E, Marks S, Khush R (2018) Why do water quality monitoring programs succeed or fail? A qualitative comparative analysis of regulated testing systems in sub-Saharan Africa. Int J Hyg Environ Health 221:907–920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheh.2018.05.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Bouwman H, Nikou S, de Reuver M (2019) Digitalization, business models, and SMEs: How do business model innovation practices improve performance of digitalizing SMEs? Telecommun Policy 43:101828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2019.101828

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Park Y, El Sawy OA, Fiss PC (2017) The role of business intelligence and communication technologies in organizational agility: a configurational approach. J Assoc Inf Syst 18:648–686. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Otte E, Rousseau R (2002) Social network analysis: a powerful strategy, also for the information sciences. J Inf Sci 28:441–453. https://doi.org/10.1177/016555150202800601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Zahra K, Azam F, Butt WH, Ilyas F (2019) User identification on social networks through text mining techniques: a systematic literature review. In: Kim KJ, Baek N (eds) Information science and applications 2018, lecture notes in electrical engineering. Springer Singapore, Singapore, pp 485–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1056-0_49

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Kleinberg J (2002) Bursty and hierarchical structure in streams. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, vol 7. https://doi.org/10.1145/775047.775061

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Information Management, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, 430079, Hubei, China

    Zeyin Chen, Xinyuan Lu & Heng Zhang

  2. Hubei Electronic Commerce Research Center, Wuhan, 430079, Hubei, China

    Xinyuan Lu

Authors
  1. Zeyin Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xinyuan Lu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Heng Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zeyin Chen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest with any financial organizations regarding the material reported in this manuscript.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, Z., Lu, X. & Zhang, H. Application status of qualitative comparative analysis methods in the international ISLS field based on social network analysis. Neural Comput & Applic 36, 2353–2369 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-023-08808-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-023-08808-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation