Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Identifying emerging research fields: a longitudinal latent semantic keyword analysis

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study aims to gain insights into emerging research fields in the area of marketing and tourism. It provides support for the use of quantitative techniques to facilitate content analysis. The authors present a longitudinal latent semantic analysis of keywords. The proposed method is illustrated by two different examples: a scholarly journal (International Marketing Review) and conference proceedings (ENTER eTourism Conference). The methodology reveals an understanding of the current state of the art of marketing research and e-tourism by identifying neglected, popular or upcoming thematic research foci. The outcomes are compared with former results generated by traditional content analysis techniques. Findings confirm that the proposed methodology has the potential to complement qualitative content analysis, as the semantic analysis produces similar outcomes to qualitative content analysis to some extent. This paper reviews a journal’s content over a period of nearly three decades. The authors argue that the suggested methodology facilitates the analysis dramatically and can thus be simply applied on a regular basis in order to monitor topic development within a specific research domain.

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

  • Agarwal, N., Rawat, M., & Maheshwari, V. (2014). Comparative analysis of Jaccard coefficient and cosine similarity for web document similarity measure. International Journal for Advance Research in Engineering and Technology, 2(X), 18–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alemneh, D., & Phillips, M. (2016). Indexing quality and effectiveness: An exploratory analysis of electronic theses and dissertations representation. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 53(1), 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andriopoulos, C., & Slater, S. (2013). Exploring the landscape of qualitative research in international marketing: Two decades of IMR. International Marketing Review, 30(4), 384–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barirani, A., Agard, B., & Beaudry, C. (2013). Competence maps using agglomerative hierarchical clustering. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 24(2), 373–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhat, A. (2014). K-medoids clustering using partitioning around medoids for performing face recognition. International Journal of Soft Computing, Mathematics and Control, 3(3), 1–12.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Blei, D. M., Ng, A. Y., & Jordan, M. I. (2003). Latent Dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3(Jan), 993–1022.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Callon, M., Rip, A., & Law, J. (Eds.). (1986). Mapping the dynamics of science and technology: Sociology of science in the real world. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Z., & Lu, Y. (2011). A word co-occurrence matrix based method for relevance feedback. Journal of Computational Information Systems, 7(1), 17–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C.-L., Tseng, F. S. C., & Liang, T. (2010). Mining fuzzy frequent itemsets for hierarchical document clustering. Information Processing and Management, 46(2), 193–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H., Zhang, G., & Lu, J. (2015). A fuzzy approach for measuring development of topics in patents using latent Dirichlet allocation. In IEEE international conference on fuzzy systems, Naples, Italy.

  • Choi, S.-S., Cha, S.-H., & Tappert, C. C. (2010). A survey of binary similarity and distance measures. Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 8(1), 43–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Das, K. (2009). Relationship marketing research (1994–2006) an academic literature review and classification. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 27(3), 326–363.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Ding, Y., Chowdhury, G. G., & Foo, S. (2001). Bibliometric cartography of information retrieval research by using co-word analysis. Information Processing and Management, 37(6), 817–842.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Emrouznejad, A., Parker, B. R., & Tavares, G. (2008). Evaluation of research in efficiency and productivity: A survey and analysis of the first 30 years of scholarly literature in DEA. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 42(3), 151–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fastoso, F., & Whitelock, J. (2007). International advertising strategy: The standardization question in manager studies. International Marketing Review, 25(5), 591–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finch, H. (2005). Comparison of distance measures in cluster analysis with dichotomous data. Journal of Data Science, 3(1), 85–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fojt, M. (1994). Anbar abstracts issue. International Marketing Review, 11(5), 1–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, J. B., West, D., Magnini, V. P., LaTour, M. S., & Polonsky, M. J. (2010). A backward glance of who and what marketing scholars have been researching, 1977–2002. Review of Marketing Research, 7, 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fritz, H., García-Escudero, L. A., & Mayo-Iscar, A. (2012). tclust: An R package for a trimming approach to cluster analysis. Journal of Statistical Software, 47(12), 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W., & Thijs, B. (2017). Using hybrid methods and ‚core documents’ for the representation of clusters and topics: The astronomy dataset. Scientometrics, 1–17 (forthcoming).

  • Gläser, J., Glänzel, W., & Scharnhorst, A. (2017). Same data—different results? Towards a comparative approach to the identification of thematic structures in science. Scientometrics, 1–18 (forthcoming).

  • Griffiths, T. H., & Steyvers, M. (2004). Finding scientific topics. PNAS, 101(1), 5228–5235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grün, B., & Hornik, K. (2011). topicmodels: An R package for fitting topic models. Journal of Statistical Software, 40(13), 1–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hahm, J. E., Kim, S. Y., Kim, M. C., & Song, M. (2013). Investigation into the existence of the indexer effect in key phrase extraction. Information Research, 18(4). Retrieved from http://InformationR.net/ir/18-4/paper594.html.

  • Healey, P., Rothman, H., & Hoch, P. (1986). An experiment in science mapping for research planning. Research Policy, 15, 233–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaur, J., & Gupta, V. (2010). Effective approaches for extraction of keywords. International Journal of Computer Science Issues, 7(6), 144–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kevork, E. K., & Vrechopoulos, A. P. (2008). CRM literature: Conceptual and functional insights by keyword analysis. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 27(1), 48–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, W. H. (2008). How to identify emerging research fields using scientometrics: An example in the field of information security. Scientometrics, 76(3), 503–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonidou, L. C., Barnes, B. R., Spyropoulou, S., & Katsikeas, C. S. (2010). Assessing the contribution of leading mainstream marketing journals to the international marketing discipline. International Marketing Review, 27(5), 491–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L. (1987). Words and co-words as indicators of the intellectual organization of the sciences. In EASST workshop. Amsterdam (December 1987).

  • Leydesdorff, L. (1997). Why words and co-words cannot map the development of the sciences. Journal of the American society for information science, 48(5), 418–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liao, S. H., Chang, W. J., Wu, C. C., & Katrichis, J. M. (2011). A survey of market orientation research (1995–2008). Industrial Marketing Management, 40(2), 301–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, W., Zhong, L., Ip, C., & Leung, D. (2011). An analysis of research on tourism information technology: The case of ENTER proceedings. In R. Law, M. Fuchs, & F. Ricci (Eds.), Information and communication technologies in tourism 2011 (pp. 293–304). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lott, B. (2012). Survey of keyword extraction techniques. http://www.cs.unm.edu/~pdevineni/papers/Lott.pdf. Accessed 20 May 2016.

  • Malhotra, N. K., Wu, L., & Whitelock, J. (2005). An overview of the first 21 years of research in the international marketing review, 1983–2003. International Marketing Review, 22(4), 391–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malhotra, N. K., Wu, L., & Whitelock, J. (2013). An updated overview of research published in the International Marketing Review: 1983 to 2011. International Marketing Review, 30(1), 7–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matsuo, Y., & Ishizuka, M. (2004). Keyword extraction from a single document using word co-occurrence statistical information. International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools, 13(1), 157–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miyosawa, T., Kitajyo, J., Hirose, H., & Tsuchiya, T. (2016). Keyword extraction of tourism information by using co-occurrence relations. International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering, 6(2), 156–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, G. (1985). Journals and the control of knowledge: A critical perspective. In L. L. Cummings & P. J. Frost (Eds.), Publishing in the organizational sciences (pp. 63–75). Homewood: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muñoz-Leiva, F., Viedma-del-Jesús, M. I., Sánchez-Fernández, J., & López-Herrera, A. G. (2012). An application of co-word analysis and bibliometric maps for detecting the most highlighting themes in the consumer behaviour research from a longitudinal perspective. Quality and Quantity, 46(4), 1077–1095.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murtagh, F., & Legendre, P. (2014). Ward’s hierarchical agglomerative clustering method: Which algorithms implement Ward’s criterion? Journal of Classification, 31, 274–295.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Nel, D., Van Heerden, G., Chan, A., Ghazisaeedi, M., Halvorson, W., & Steyn, P. (2011). Eleven years of scholarly research in the journal of services marketing. Journal of Services Marketing, 25(1), 4–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ngai, E. W. (2003). Internet marketing research (1987–2000): A literature review and classification. European Journal of Marketing, 37(1/2), 24–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Padilla, G., Cartea, M. E., & Ordás, A. (2007). Comparison of several clustering methods in grouping kale landraces. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 132(3), 387–395.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pourfakhimi, S., & Ying, T. (2015). The evolution of eTourism research: A case of ENTER conference. In I. Tussyadiah & A. Inversini (Eds.), Information and communication technologies in tourism 2015 (pp. 859–871). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team. (2016). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R foundation for statistical computing. www.R-project.org. Accessed 25 May 2016.

  • Wartena, Ch., & Brusse, R. (2008). Topic detection by clustering keywords. In Proceedings of the 2010 workshops on database and expert systems applications (DEXA) (pp. 54–58) 2010. Turin, Italy: IEEE Computer Society.

  • 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 

  • Reed, D. D., Reed, F. D. D., Jenkins, S., & Hirst, J. M. (2014). The zeitgeist of behavior analytic research in the 21st century: A keyword analysis. The Behavior Analyst Today, 14(1&2), 17–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, L. M., & Adler, R. D. (2015). Who provides excellence in marketing doctoral education? A citation analysis of Ph.D. Graduates. In H. E. Spotts (Ed.), Assessing the different roles of marketing theory and practice in the jaws of economic uncertainty. Developments in marketing science: Proceedings of the academy of marketing science (pp. 108–113). Cham: Springer.

  • Seggie, S. H., & Griffith, D. A. (2009). What does it take to get promoted in marketing academia? Understanding exceptional publication productivity in the leading marketing journals. Journal of Marketing, 73(1), 122–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siddiqi, S., & Sharan, A. (2015). Keyword and keyphrase extraction techniques: A literature review. International Journal of Computer Applications, 109(2), 18–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stavrianou, A., Andritsos, P., & Nicoloyannis, N. (2007). Overview and semantic issues of text mining. ACM Sigmod Record, 36(3), 23–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Su, H. N., & Lee, P. C. (2010). Mapping knowledge structure by keyword co-occurrence: A first look at journal papers in technology foresight. Scientometrics, 85(1), 65–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suzuki, R., & Shimodaira, H. (2006). Pvclust: An R package for assessing the uncertainty in hierarchical clustering. Bioinformatics, 22(12), 1540–1542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thada, V., & Jaglan, V. (2013). Comparison of Jaccard, dice, cosine similarity coefficient to find best fitness value for web retrieved documents using genetic algorithm. International Journal of Innovations in Engineering and Technology, 2(4), 20–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thijs, B., Schiebel, E., & Glänzel, W. (2013). Do second-order similarities provide added-value in a hybrid approach? Scientometrics, 96(3), 667–677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Üsdiken, B., & Pasadeos, Y. (1995). Organizational analysis in North America and Europe: A comparison of co-citation networks. Organization Studies, 16(3), 503–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Raan, A., & Tijssen, R. (1993). The neural net of neural network research: An exercise in bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 26(1), 169–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Velden, T., Boyack, K.W., Gläser, J., Koopman, R., Scharnhorst, A., & Wang, S. (2017). Comparison of topic extraction approaches and their results. Scientometrics, 1–53 (forthcoming).

  • Wang, L., Guo, S., Leung, D., & Law, R. (2013). A citation analysis of ENTER proceedings in 2005–2012. In L. Cantoni & Z. Xiang (Eds.), Information and communication technologies in tourism 2013 (pp. 268–279). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, S., & Koopman, R. (2017). Clustering articles based on semantic similarity. Scientometrics, 1–15 (forthcoming).

  • Ward, J. H. (1963). Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 58(301), 236–244.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Warrens, M.J. (2008). Similarity coefficients for binary data: Properties of coefficients, coefficient matrices, multi-way metrics and multivariate coefficients. Ph.D. thesis, Leiden University, Netherlands.

  • Wartena, C., Brusse, R., & Slakhorst, W. (2010). Keyword Extraction using word co-occurrence. In Proceedings of the 2010 workshops on database and expert systems applications (DEXA) (pp. 54–58). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.

  • White, H., Willis, C., & Greenberg, J. (2014). HIVEing: The effect of a semantic web technology on inter-indexer consistency. Journal of Documentation, 70(3), 307–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whittaker, J. (1989). Creativity and conformity in science: Titles, keywords and co-word analysis. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 473–496.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Wijaya, S. H., Afendi, F. M., Batubara, I., Darusman, L. K., Altaf-Ul-Amin, Md, & Kanaya, S. (2016). Finding an appropriate equation to measure similarity between binary vectors: Case studies on Indonesian and Japanese herbal medicines. BMC Bioinformatics, 17(520), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, B. C., & Plouffe, C. R. (2007). Assessing the evolution of sales knowledge: A 20-year content analysis. Industrial Marketing Management, 36(4), 408–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, X., Kumar, V., Quinlan, J. R., Ghosh, J., Yang, Q., Motoda, H., et al. (2008). Top 10 algorithms in data mining. Knowledge and Information Systems, 14(1), 1–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yale, L., & Gilly, M. C. (1988). Trends in advertising research: A look at the content of marketing-oriented journals from 1976 to 1985. Journal of Advertising, 17(1), 12–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yau, C. K., Porter, A., Newman, N., & Suominen, A. (2014). Clustering scientific documents with topic modeling. Scientometrics, 100(3), 767–786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahrotun, L. (2016). Comparison Jaccard similarity, cosine similarity and combined both of the data clustering with shared nearest neighbor method. Computer Engineering and Applications, 5(1), 11–18.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. MODUL University Vienna, Vienna, Austria

    Christian Weismayer

  2. FHWien der WKW, University of Applied Sciences for Management & Communication, Vienna, Austria

    Ilona Pezenka

Authors
  1. Christian Weismayer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ilona Pezenka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christian Weismayer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Weismayer, C., Pezenka, I. Identifying emerging research fields: a longitudinal latent semantic keyword analysis. Scientometrics 113, 1757–1785 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2555-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2555-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation