Abstract
Prof. Zeyuan Liu was the first to introduce the concept of knowledge-domain mapping to the scientific community in China. Knowledge-domain maps are useful tools for tracking the frontiers of science and technology, facilitating knowledge management, and assisting scientific and technological decision-making. Science overlay mapping as a type of knowledge-domain mapping can visualize the location of research within the sciences from both snapshots at any fixed time and from a dynamic perspective. Most current science overlay maps merely show the basic landscape of a research field during specific periods, but fail to track temporal changes and interactions between different research fields. Applying an individual document-based cross-citation approach to a dataset retrieved in the Web of Science Core Collection for the period 1999–2018, we have built a global science map based on cognitive similarities across the 16 ECOOM major research fields. Using citation-link strength (CLS), we then traced information flows to better understand how the internal structures of these research fields have evolved. The paper concludes with a brief description of the emergence and development of the mapping of knowledge domains in China, in general, and highlights the contribution of Zeyuan Liu to the topic of mapping knowledge domains, in particular.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Liu, who passed away in February 2020, was the professor and dean of Humanities & Social Sciences College at the Dalian University of Technology and received the First Outstanding Contribution Award and was made a Lifetime Honorary Member of the Chinese Association for Science of Science and S&T Policy.
All items extracted from the WoS database have been assigned to 16 broad fields and 74 individual subfields according to the modified Leuven-Budapest classification system (see Table 4).
The ‘WISE’ is the abbreviation for Webometrics, Informetrics, Scientometrics, and Econometrics.
References
Ahlgren, P., Jarneving, B., & Rousseau, R. (2003). Requirements for a cocitation similarity measure, with special reference to Pearson’s correlation coefficient. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(6), 550–560. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.10242.
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, 2008(10), P10008. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2008/10/p10008.
Börner, K., Chen, C., & Boyack, K. W. (2003). Visualizing knowledge domains. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 37(1), 179–255. https://doi.org/10.1002/aris.1440370106.
Boyack, K. W. (2004). Mapping knowledge domains: Characterizing PNAS. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(suppl 1), 5192–5199. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0307509100.
Boyack, K., & 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.
Boyack, K. W., Klavans, R., & Börner, K. (2005). Mapping the backbone of science. Scientometrics, 64(3), 351–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0255-6.
Braam, R. R., Moed, H. F., & van Raan, A. F. J. (1991). Mapping of science by combined co-citation and word analysis. I. Structural aspects. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(4), 233–251. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-4571(199105)42:4%3c233:aid-asi1%3e3.0.co;2-i.
Callon, M., Courtial, J.-P., & Laville, F. (1991). Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemistry. Scientometrics, 22(1), 155–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02019280.
Callon, M., Courtial, J.-P., Turner, W. A., & Bauin, S. (1983). From translations to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis. Social Science Information, 22(2), 191–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901883022002003.
Callon, M., Rip, A., & Law, J. (1986). Mapping the dynamics of science and technology: Sociology of science in the real world. London: Springer.
Carley, S., Porter, A. L., Rafols, I., & Leydesdorff, L. (2017). Visualization of disciplinary profiles: Enhanced science overlay maps. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2(3), 68–111. https://doi.org/10.1515/jdis-2017-0015.
Chen, C. (2003). Mapping scientific frontiers: The quest for knowledge visualization. London: Springer.
Chen, C. (2004). Searching for intellectual turning points: Progressive knowledge domain visualization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(suppl 1), 5303–5310. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0307513100.
Chen, C. (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. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20317.
Chen, C. (2017). Science mapping: A systematic review of the literature (review). Journal of Data and Information Science, 2(2), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1515/jdis-2017-0006.
Chen, C., Dubin, R., & Kim, M. C. (2014). Emerging trends and new developments in regenerative medicine: A scientometric update (2000–2014). Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy, 14(9), 1295–1317. https://doi.org/10.1517/14712598.2014.920813.
Chen, C., Hu, Z., Liu, S., & Tseng, H. (2012). Emerging trends in regenerative medicine: A scientometric analysis in CiteSpace. Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy, 12(5), 593–608. https://doi.org/10.1517/14712598.2012.674507.
Chen, C., & Leydesdorff, L. (2014). Patterns of connections and movements in dual-map overlays: A new method of publication portfolio analysis. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(2), 334–351. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22968.
Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the Fuzzy Sets Theory field. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 146–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.002.
Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2012). SciMAT: A new science mapping analysis software tool. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(8), 1609–1630. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22688.
de Solla Price, D. J. (1965). Networks of Scientific Papers. Science, 149(3683), 510–515. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.149.3683.510.
Egghe, L. (2006). Theory and practise of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69(1), 131–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0144-7.
Fortunato, S., Bergstrom, C. T., Börner, K., Evans, J. A., Helbing, D., Milojević, S., et al. (2018). Science of science. Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao0185.
Freeman, L. C. (1978). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1(3), 215–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7.
Garfield, E., Paris, S. W., & Stock, W. G. (2006). HistCite™: A software tool for informetric analysis of citation linkage. Information Wissenschaft und Praxis, 57(8), 391–400.
Garfield, E., Sher, I. H., & Torpie, R. J. (1964). The use of citation data in writing the history of science. Philadelphia: Institute for Scientific Information.
Glänzel, W. (2012). The role of core documents in bibliometric network analysis and their relation with h-type indices. Scientometrics, 93(1), 113–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0639-3.
Glänzel, W., & Czerwon, H. J. (1996). A new methodological approach to bibliographic coupling and its application to the national, regional and institutional level. Scientometrics, 37(2), 195–221. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02093621.
Glänzel, W., Janssens, F., Speybroeck, S., Schubert, A., Thijs, B., & Rafols, I. (2006). Towards a bibliometrics-aided data retrieval for scientometric purposes. In Book of abstracts of the 9th international conference on science and technology indicators. Leuven, Belgium, 7–9 September 2006, pp. 206–208.
Glänzel, W., Janssens, F., & Thijs, B. (2009). A comparative analysis of publication activity and citation impact based on the core literature in bioinformatics. Scientometrics, 79(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0407-1.
Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2003). A new classification scheme of science fields and subfields designed for scientometric evaluation purposes. Scientometrics, 56(3), 357–367. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022378804087.
Glänzel, W., & Thijs, B. (2017). Using hybrid methods and ‘core documents’ for the representation of clusters and topics: The astronomy dataset. Scientometrics, 111(2), 1071–1087. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2301-6.
Glänzel, W., Thijs, B., & Chi, P.-S. (2016). The challenges to expand bibliometric studies from periodical literature to monographic literature with a new data source: The book citation index. Scientometrics, 109(3), 2165–2179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2046-7.
Griffith, B. C., Small, H. G., Stonehill, J. A., & Dey, S. (1974). The structure of scientific literatures II: Toward a macro- and microstructure for science. Science Studies, 4(4), 339–365. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631277400400402.
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569–16572. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102.
Huang, Y., Li, R., Zhang, L., & Sivertsen, G. (2021). A comprehensive analysis of the journal evaluation system in China. Quantitative Science Studies. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/7cfxd.
Huang, Y., Schuehle, J., Porter, A. L., & Youtie, J. (2015). A systematic method to create search strategies for emerging technologies based on the Web of Science: Illustrated for ‘Big Data’. Scientometrics, 105(3), 2005–2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1638-y.
Huang, Y., Zhu, D., Qian, Y., Zhang, Y., Porter, A. L., Liu, Y., et al. (2017). A hybrid method to trace technology evolution pathways: A case study of 3D printing. Scientometrics, 111(1), 185–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2271-8.
Kay, L., Newman, N., Youtie, J., Porter, A. L., & Rafols, I. (2014). Patent overlay mapping: Visualizing technological distance. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(12), 2432–2443. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23146.
Kessler, M. M. (1963). Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers. American Documentation, 14(1), 10–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.5090140103.
Klavans, R., & Boyack, K. W. (2006). Quantitative evaluation of large maps of science. Scientometrics, 68(3), 475–499. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0125-x.
Klavans, R., & Boyack, K. W. (2010). Toward an objective, reliable and accurate method for measuring research leadership. Scientometrics, 82(3), 539–553. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0188-6.
Leydesdorff, L., de Moya-Anegón, F., & de Nooy, W. (2016). Aggregated journal–journal citation relations in scopus and web of science matched and compared in terms of networks, maps, and interactive overlays. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(9), 2194–2211. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23372.
Leydesdorff, L., de Moya-Anegón, F., & Guerrero-Bote, V. P. (2015). Journal maps, interactive overlays, and the measurement of interdisciplinarity on the basis of Scopus data (1996–2012). Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(5), 1001–1016. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23243.
Leydesdorff, L., Kushnir, D., & Rafols, I. (2014). Interactive overlay maps for US patent (USPTO) data based on International Patent Classification (IPC). Scientometrics, 98(3), 1583–1599. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0923-2.
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. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20967.
Liu, Z., Chen, Y., & Hou, H. (2008). Mapping knowledge domains: Methods and application. Beijing: People’s Publishing House. (In Chinese).
Liu, Z., Chen, Y., & Hou, H. (2012a). Mapping of fronts of technological sciences and China strategy. Beijing: People’s Publishing House. (In Chinese).
Liu, X., Glänzel, W., & De Moor, B. (2012b). Optimal and hierarchical clustering of large-scale hybrid networks for scientific mapping. Scientometrics, 91(2), 473–493. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0600-x.
Marshakova, I. V. (1973). System of connections between documents based on references (as the Science Citation Index). Nauchno-Tekhnicheskaya Informatsiya, Seriya, 2(6), 3–8. (In Russian).
McCain, K. W. (1990). Mapping authors in intellectual space: A technical overview. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 41(6), 433–443. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-4571(199009)41:6%3c433:Aid-asi11%3e3.0.Co;2-q.
Moya-Anegón, F., Vargas-Quesada, B., Herrero-Solana, V., Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Corera-Álvarez, E., & Munoz-Fernández, F. J. (2004). A new technique for building maps of large scientific domains based on the co-citation of classes and categories. Scientometrics, 61(1), 129–145. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000037368.31217.34.
Newman, M. E. J., & Girvan, M. (2004). Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. Physical Review E, 69(2), 026113. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.69.026113.
Ni, C., Sugimoto, C., & Jiang, J. (2011) ‘Degree, closeness, and betweenness: Application of group centrality measurements to explore macro-disciplinary evolution diachronically’ Proceedings of ISSI, pp. 1–13.
Pan, X., Yan, E., Cui, M., & Hua, W. (2018). Examining the usage, citation, and diffusion patterns of bibliometric mapping software: A comparative study of three tools. Journal of Informetrics, 12(2), 481–493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.03.005.
Peters, H. P., & van Raan, A. F. (1993a). Co-word-based science maps of chemical engineering. Part I: Representations by direct multidimensional scaling. Research Policy, 22(1), 23–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(93)90031-c.
Peters, H. P., & van Raan, A. F. (1993b). Co-word-based science maps of chemical engineering. Part II: Representations by combined clustering and multidimensional scaling. Research Policy, 22(1), 47–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(93)90032-d.
Rafols, I., Porter, A. L., & Leydesdorff, L. (2010). Science overlay maps: A new tool for research policy and library management. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(9), 1871–1887. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21368.
Rosvall, M., & Bergstrom, C. T. (2008). Maps of random walks on complex networks reveal community structure. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(4), 1118–1123. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0706851105.
Rotolo, D., Rafols, I., Hopkins, M. M., & Leydesdorff, L. (2017). Strategic intelligence on emerging technologies: Scientometric overlay mapping. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(1), 214–233. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23631.
Schubert, A., Korn, A., & Telcs, A. (2009). Hirsch-type indices for characterizing networks. Scientometrics, 78(2), 375–382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-2218-1.
Sen, S. K., & Gan, S. K. (1983). A mathematical extension of the idea of bibliographic coupling and its applications. Annals of Library Science and Documentation, 30, 78–82.
Shiffrin, R. M., & Börner, K. (2004). Mapping knowledge domains. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(suppl 1), 5183–5185. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0307852100.
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. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630240406.
Small, H., & Griffith, B. C. (1974). The Structure of Scientific Literatures I: Identifying and Graphing Specialties. Science Studies, 4(1), 17–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631277400400102.
Thijs, B., Zhang, L., & Glänzel, W. (2015). Bibliographic coupling and hierarchical clustering for the validation and improvement of subject-classification schemes. Scientometrics, 105(3), 1453–1467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1641-3.
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2009). How to normalize cooccurrence data? An analysis of some well-known similarity measures. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(8), 1635–1651. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21075.
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSViewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3.
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2014). Visualizing bibliometric networks. In Y. Ding, R. Rousseau, & D. Wolfram (Eds.), Measuring scholarly impact: Methods and practice (pp. 285–320). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10377-8_13.
van Eck, N. J., Waltman, L., Dekker, R., & van den Berg, J. (2010). A comparison of two techniques for bibliometric mapping: Multidimensional scaling and VOS. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(12), 2405–2416. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21421.
Waltman, L., van Eck, N. J., & Noyons, E. C. M. (2010). A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks. Journal of Informetrics, 4(4), 629–635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.07.002.
White, H. D., & Griffith, B. C. (1981). Author co-citation: A literature measure of intellectual structure. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 32(3), 163–171. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630320302.
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. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-4571(19980401)49:4%3c327:Aid-asi4%3e3.0.Co;2-4.
Zhang, L., Glänzel, W., & Liang, L. (2009). Tracing the role of individual journals in a cross-citation network based on different indicators. Scientometrics, 81(3), 821–838. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-2245-y.
Zhang, L., Rousseau, R., & Glänzel, W. (2016). Diversity of references as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of journals: Taking similarity between subject fields into account. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(5), 1257–1265. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23487.
Zitt, M., & Bassecoulard, E. (2006). Delineating complex scientific fields by hybrid lexical-citation method: An application to nanoscience. Information Processing and Management, 42(6), 1513–1531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2006.03.016.
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 72004169; 71974150; 71573085; 71904096), the National Social Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 18VSJ087), and the National Laboratory Center for Library and Information Science in Wuhan University. We also thank Dr. Yuqin Liu, who provides the license of the powerful visualization tool—ITGInsight.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Huang, Y., Glänzel, W. & Zhang, L. Tracing the development of mapping knowledge domains. Scientometrics 126, 6201–6224 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03821-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03821-x